Welcome to Gaia! ::

The Conservatives of Gaia

Back to Guilds

For those Tired of a oversized goverment, for those who remember that paper called the constitution 

Tags: Conservatism, Chuck norris, Reagan, William F. Buckley, common sense 

Reply Discussion Area
So Now Our Votes Don't Count? Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Tsukasa wave

Tipsy Trader

9,200 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Pie Hoarder by Proxy 150
PostPosted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:12 am


Dusty Golightly
Holy Rocker101
Dusty Golightly
The majority of people who voted in California whether to make gay marriage legal or not voted against it. Then a U.S. District Judge - who happens to be a homosexual himself - overturned that constitutional vote by ruling that vote unconstitutional!

Whether you are for or against gay marriage should make no difference in your evaluation of this. Since when is it unconstitutional for Americans to vote on any issue in this country? That's the most important issue here. In California the will of the people was replaced by the will of U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker! What's truly unconstitutional is that this judge overuled the will of the people! The fact that the judge is gay himself makes him suspect. But by the same token, if he were not gay and ruled to not overturn the vote of the people, I suppose gays would be suspicious of him. I would still be upset if the people voted for gay marriage and a judge overturned it because I don't believe any judge should have the right to overrule the majority of the people. This is America, not Nazi Germany! But it's quite complicated and I think this entire issue should be placed before the Supreme Court. Not whether gay marriage should be made legal or not but more importantly "Does a judge have the right to go against the legal vote of the majority of the people?"

Since this was a legal vote by the people of California, should this have gone to court in the first place? My answer is "No".

Is this an indication that our rights in this country are being usurped? My answer is "Yes".

If this is allowed to stand will even more Judges believe they have the right to go against our constitution and override the will of the people? Again, my answer is "Yes".

If allowed to stand, this judge will have set a precedent and it will become a slippery slope where we will see more and more of this occurring on all sorts of issues. That should concern all of us regardless of our sexual preferences!


I totally understand what you mean. Trust me, but it is hard for me to really be understanding when what that particular judge did was administer a fundamental right to a group of "Americans" that have always been disenfranchised. Remember, majority rules is not always right. The people who voted against gay marriage went against their own constitution because they withheld a right from a members of their own nation. I am straight and I support gay marriage. I don't know why "straight" people care so much about the rights of homosexual or bisexual individuals. It doesn't affect their lives in any way.


People who object to gay marriage don't necessarily object to gays. Most have no problem with homosexuals living together. What they object to is them being married in a traditional way that has always been exclusively between a man and a woman. They believe it will be detrimental to family values. Whether they are right or wrong about that I personally can't say, and speaking of "personally", as a Christian I find it to be blasphemous to call a union between homosexuals a "marriage". Now we get into the discussion of faith, which I don't want to argue with anyone, but I must bring it up because that is the main reason many Christians disagree with it. Not all of them though. I know people who allude to themselves as "Christians" but take nothing in the bible literally. Neither do I take everything in the Bible literally... much of the bible is made of allegories to teach with, and I think it's impossible for anyone to decipher the bible in it's entirety. But it is a fact that the Bible states that man shall not lie with man, and from the way that aids was spread amongst the homosexual community I think there was a good reason for that, other than the fact that homosexuals cannot propogate. On the other side of the coin, we heterosexuals are doing a great job of overpopulating the earth. This subjects has many twists and turns to consider and will never be agreed on by all, one way or the other. The bottom line is that I believe that the people's vote should always be the rule, and that it's not up to a judge to decide the validity of the vote but to honor it. That is what our country is all about. There will always be another time for another vote, and I predict that someday homosexuals will have their way, but they are pushing it down the throats of those who object to it far to early.


you took the words right out of my mouth
PostPosted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:40 am


Holy Rocker101
Dusty Golightly
The majority of people who voted in California whether to make gay marriage legal or not voted against it. Then a U.S. District Judge - who happens to be a homosexual himself - overturned that constitutional vote by ruling that vote unconstitutional!

Whether you are for or against gay marriage should make no difference in your evaluation of this. Since when is it unconstitutional for Americans to vote on any issue in this country? That's the most important issue here. In California the will of the people was replaced by the will of U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker! What's truly unconstitutional is that this judge overuled the will of the people! The fact that the judge is gay himself makes him suspect. But by the same token, if he were not gay and ruled to not overturn the vote of the people, I suppose gays would be suspicious of him. I would still be upset if the people voted for gay marriage and a judge overturned it because I don't believe any judge should have the right to overrule the majority of the people. This is America, not Nazi Germany! But it's quite complicated and I think this entire issue should be placed before the Supreme Court. Not whether gay marriage should be made legal or not but more importantly "Does a judge have the right to go against the legal vote of the majority of the people?"

Since this was a legal vote by the people of California, should this have gone to court in the first place? My answer is "No".

Is this an indication that our rights in this country are being usurped? My answer is "Yes".

If this is allowed to stand will even more Judges believe they have the right to go against our constitution and override the will of the people? Again, my answer is "Yes".

If allowed to stand, this judge will have set a precedent and it will become a slippery slope where we will see more and more of this occurring on all sorts of issues. That should concern all of us regardless of our sexual preferences!


I totally understand what you mean. Trust me, but it is hard for me to really be understanding when what that particular judge did was administer a fundamental right to a group of "Americans" that have always been disenfranchised. Remember, majority rules is not always right. The people who voted against gay marriage went against their own constitution because they withheld a right from a members of their own nation. I am straight and I support gay marriage. I don't know why "straight" people care so much about the rights of homosexual or bisexual individuals. It doesn't affect their lives in any way.


Jimminy Christmas, people, marriage is not a right! I know this rant has nothing to do with voting rights, but I just need to get it out because hardly anyone can get it through their thick skulls. Marriage is not a right for anyone, okay. I don't care if you're heterosexual, homosexual, black, hispanic, greek, trisexual, bisexual, a *****, or someone who wants more than one husband/wife; marriage is not a right. If marriage was a right, then wouldn't not marrying someone be illegal? It's their right. Also, divorce would be illegal because both parties have the "right" to be married. People could be married to toilet seats, little children, more than one person, or whomever they pleased if marriage was a "right". I think that's where gay marriage has gone wrong. Gay people are assuming that marriage is a right when it isn't. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that marriage is a right. Nowhere in the Constitution does it define marriage. Marriage is not a right. If it was, then my mom would be remarried, or still married to my jerk of a sperm donor. "Gay Rights" are a bunch of garbage. Gays have the same rights as heterosexuals.

NosferatuGirl

14,300 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Citizen 200
  • Forum Sophomore 300

Tsukasa wave

Tipsy Trader

9,200 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Pie Hoarder by Proxy 150
PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 3:48 pm


NosferatuGirl
If marriage was a right, then wouldn't not marrying someone be illegal?


no like people have a right to own a gun that dose not mean they have to own one its a choice
Reply
Discussion Area

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum