Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

History in the making

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Monday, June 16, 2008 10:00 pm

History will be made at 8 a.m. today in Stockton and Sacramento.

Marriage licenses for same-sex couples will be issued in San Joaquin, Sacramento and California's 56 other counties in response to the California Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage by a 4-3 vote on May 15.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

You must login to view the full content on this page.

Thank you for reading 20 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 20 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription at this time and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 209-369-2761. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

177 comments:

  • posted at 5:19 am on Sat, Jun 28, 2008.

    Posts:

    Brian, you have me intereted too. How does this Giant Gay Lobby you speak of work?

     
  • posted at 4:00 am on Sat, Jun 28, 2008.

    Posts:

    Why not tell us, Brian, how the Giant Gay Lobby works?I've listened (as have you, apparently) to Michael Wiener-Savage make the same ridiculous claim and he has been unable to substantiate it.Can you?How does recruitment work? How exactly do they accomplish that?How does the "Gay Lobby" work?Let's see some details.And by the way, what ever happened to that "Falcon" character?

     
  • posted at 3:22 am on Fri, Jun 27, 2008.

    Posts:

    They are one of the most powerful lobbies in the country. Hello!

     
  • posted at 3:21 am on Fri, Jun 27, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater wrote on Jun 24, 2008 8:07 AM:" It's easier to feel empowered by hating a powerless group than to fight the powers that be.How ignorant you are to say that the gay community does not have any power.I would argue that they have a lot of power indeed and the majority of them don't play the powerless victim as you and Lodian make them out to be. Perhapsa formal apology to the gay community for your blanket statement would be suitable.

     
  • posted at 3:15 am on Fri, Jun 27, 2008.

    Posts:

    Lodian wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:43 PM:" Brian wrote "Do you realize the gay community wants more strength and more numbers will help this?"Brian: You don't know much about the gay community. "Lodian, perhaps I don't know as much as you. However, your denial that there is strength in numbers goes against everything that that most perople have been taught.Lodian, give me some evidence that the gay community does not want to grow and I'll sell you some beachfront property in Blythe, CA.

     
  • posted at 4:13 pm on Tue, Jun 24, 2008.

    Posts:

    These gay bashers just spew a lot of hatred and have no legit reasons for their nasty degrading comments.

     
  • posted at 3:07 am on Tue, Jun 24, 2008.

    Posts:

    It's easier to feel empowered by hating a powerless group than to fight the powers that be. A nice distraction to the chaos that has transpired in the last 25 years of our nation. Unbridled greed from the ultra rich (Wall Street and their ilk) will be the downfall of America, not gays.

     
  • posted at 3:03 am on Tue, Jun 24, 2008.

    Posts:

    but then again, shrub and his Patriot act has made a mockery of 200 years of free will and civil rights. I just found out that the Patriot Act allows the FBI to come to a therapist's office and DEMAND to see a client's records. They must be surrendered and the therapist cannot tell the client about any of this. How fascist can this be? What purpose does it serve, other than political. Most Muslim terrorists don't visit shrinks on a regular basis. I just wish people would wake up, but I guess reality is just too scary for some.

     
  • posted at 3:01 am on Tue, Jun 24, 2008.

    Posts:

    Lodian, that's a good point of it being civil rights, of which it is. I find Brian's posts incrediably disturbing. I even said a prayer for him to bring some love and kindness to his heart. I can understand if you don't believe in something for moral reasons, but it seems extreme here. I know many kind gay and lesbian couples who would benefit from marriage. They are more more stable and sane than a lot of straights that I know. I have huge concerns that some people feel that they can so easily disregard the Constitution so readily.

     
  • posted at 3:50 pm on Mon, Jun 23, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater wrote "...As I said before, if someone can make a VALID reason why gay marriage will affect my marriage, I am more than willing to give it a long listen."shrubeater: No one here that is against gay marriage has offered any valid reason why gay marriage is detrimental to anyone. That is because there is NO reason why gays should not be married. The only reasons they (the ones that deny gays their rights) give are religious reasons. We should remember that this is about civil rights, not religion. Thank GOD!

     
  • posted at 3:43 pm on Mon, Jun 23, 2008.

    Posts:

    Brian wrote "Do you realize the gay community wants more strength and more numbers will help this?"Brian: You don't know much about the gay community.

     
  • posted at 1:04 pm on Mon, Jun 23, 2008.

    Posts:

    Brian, I believe people are gay or they are not, it is not a choice, at least to all clinical literature that I have read. I bring up hetero marrigage, because I frequently hear that gay marriage somehow denigrates straight marriage. I think we have a serious marriage issue (divorce) that needs looked at. As I said before, if someone can make a VALID reason why gay marriage will affect my marriage, I am more than willing to give it a long listen.

     
  • posted at 1:53 pm on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Shrub wrote: Hetersexual marriages fail at I believe 52%. Lots of crap going on here and I don't think gays have much to do with it.Shrub,That said, then why did you feel the need to bring up hetero divorce rate? Is it somehow going to go down because there are a lot of heteros that are closet gays that want to be in a same sex marriage? Do you realize the gay community wants more strength and more numbers will help this? This is one of the reasons why the vast majority of society is opposed to same sex marriage.

     
  • posted at 1:13 pm on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater, that article was indeed a breath of fresh air.

     
  • posted at 1:07 pm on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    I think I feel some hope after reading this. Some youngsters who are actually thinking and doing, wow, what a concept: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080622/pl_nm/usa_politics_evangelicals_dc

     
  • posted at 10:40 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Voter wrote, 'G--many (and I'm not referring to you) give lip service to this hate the sin, love the sinner plan, but their actions do not bear this out. Even in some churches, where you think this would be hammered home, leaders use the term "liberal" as if it was a dirty word.'And this, of course goes both ways. The word 'conservative' is rarely spoken with respect from those on the left. While I cannot expect anyone to follow my advice, but I have suggested that in response to those who personally attack others in a feeble attempt to further their causes they should simply be ignored, although I realize just how difficult it is to do.

     
  • posted at 10:18 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    And that is the gist of my point in a nut shell. "Us" vs. "Them". Because they have different views, they are, in fact, evil.

     
  • posted at 10:09 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Voter wrote, 'G--many (and I'm not referring to you) give lip service to this hate the sin, love the sinner plan, but their actions do not bear this out. Even in some churches, where you think this would be hammered home, leaders use the term "liberal" as if it was a dirty word.'And this, of course goes both ways. The word 'conservative' is rarely spoken with respect from those on the left. While I cannot expect anyone to follow my advice, but I have suggested that in response to those who personally attack others in a feeble attempt to further their causes they should simply be ignored, although I realize just how difficult it is to do.

     
  • posted at 9:59 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    G--many (and I'm not referring to you) give lip service to this hate the sin, love the sinner plan, but their actions do not bear this out. Even in some churches, where you think this would be hammered home, leaders use the term "liberal" as if it was a dirty word.

     
  • posted at 9:54 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Voter - as this pertains to Christianity, those who truly desire to be 'Christ-like' do not condemn the person, just the activity that runs counter to their beliefs. Since my beliefs do dictate that I behave in this fashion, I rarely attack a human being. I do offer my opinion and as my faith also requires attempt to persuade them to change. At the point well before disparaging language or threats become used, I realize that I've done all that I can; further discussion is fruitless. Yet I know many gay people who I truly love; I find them captivating, loving, intelligent, ambitious, giving, funny, and everything else that I find wonderful in people. The fact that their sexual orientation is in opposition to what I believe to be 'right,' I will nevertheless continue to love and respect them.Further, if they believe in Christianity and yet continue with their lifestyle I do NOT believe that they will be condemned to Hell. If they are, then I will be warming up right beside them in the nether regions because of my own spiritual failings.

     
  • posted at 9:44 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    G--what you are referring to as good vs. evil in regards to acceptable social behavior, I would call the basic morality of the culture. This "us" and "them" way of thinking that spills over into politics is something else entirely. Law abiding citizens, and God forbid, anyone of another culture, are often painted as evil, simply for having a different viewpoint. It's not just that their particular take on a topic is "evil" (which would be bad enough), it's that they, as human beings, are described in derogatory terms. "Either you're with us, or you're with the enemy." That really bothers me.

     
  • posted at 9:31 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Voter - human beings require a 'good' and 'evil' dichotomy. This is why we have laws - to differentiate between right and wrong (good/evil) and impose penalties upon those who would do evil to others. Or are you referring to something altogether different?

     
  • posted at 9:28 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Voter, yes that's true. I remember an aid to the Rev. Falwell being concerned that one day Falwell said thank God for gays. If they didn't exist I would have had to invent them. I still stick my my opinion that gays cause little mayhem. As far as teaching "gayness" in school. I think we are to a point we are stuggling to teach kids anything. The latest survey is that many young kids think they are going to grow up and be rich and famous. Oh my are they in store for some reality testing.

     
  • posted at 9:13 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater, fundamentalist religion needs an "us" and a "them", "good" and "evil" dichotomy. This tendency was used as a basis to polarize politics.

     
  • posted at 8:58 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    It just dawned on me what the US needs. We need an outside force to HATE. When the USSR was there, we ALL focused on them. For a couple of years we then focused on OBL. Now, we have found a group internally to hate. Not good! It's like when a family fights over an inheritence. All the time, energy, and love built by parents can be destroyed overnight by hateful fighting brats who felt they didn't get what "they deserved". I can see the parallel here.

     
  • posted at 8:30 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Brain, put children in private schools. I think the No Child Left Behind act has just about destroyed our public schools. Drones that are produced by us will help compete with Chinese drones though. We just need to stop spoiling them because you can't produce a drone that wants to consume the good stuff. That's just for the top 1% of the US now. Stockton has one school with a 50% drop out rate. Hetersexual marriages fail at I believe 52%. Lots of crap going on here and I don't think gays have much to do with it.

     
  • posted at 8:13 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Shrub Wrote: The hysterical part of the whole gay marriage debate is that this group is a tiny, tiny part of society. Shrub, And this tiny, tiny part of society has such a huge impact on how the whole education system will have to be changedwhen it comes to how marriage is viewed.There are many distinct differences between a man and a woman.To quote Winston Wallace:"With the legalization of homosexual marriage, public schools in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Textbooks, even in conservative states, will have to depict man/man and woman/woman relationships, and stories written for children as young as elementary school, or even kindergarten, will have to give equal space to homosexuals." To be a proponent of same sex marriageyou should take responsibility for the actions of children that may have trouble understanding the distincet differences between a man and a women as a result of same sex marriage education in public schools.

     
  • posted at 6:55 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Shrubeater, 'I just noticed the time and thought it was church time, yes tongue was in cheek.'And I suspected as much. My 'explaining' to you what I 'may' do with regard to my religious activities wasn't out of any defense to your comment. I was simply affording you reasonable explanations as to why those who may further their beliefs on these blogs on a Sunday morning could very well be attending 'church' in ways unknown to those desiring to belittle them.

     
  • posted at 6:53 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Girard, I respect your ability to worhsip and believe as you feel drawn to do. I thank our forefathers for all they gave to make this happen. They sit things in motion because they were wise men who wanted American to last and wisely instituted the Constitution. I feel those in power now cannot see past their noses and could careless about the next generation. My greatest fear is that American will collape before I die and that's what I mean by distractions. The neocons are a smart group and it's working.

     
  • posted at 6:42 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater wrote, 'I am just sick of this distraction. I truly believe America is at a crossroads and we are sinking, but it's not because of gay marriage and abortion.'While you may consider the matter to be a 'distraction,' there are many others who obviously believe it to be much more than that. You should understand that many Americans actually live their lives according to their faith (as best as they can); not merely as an extension of it. This causes issues such as homosexuality, same-sex marriage, divorce, abortion and many others to be of extreme relevance to them. And there is really nothing wrong with that.Yet just as those who do not live according to any spiritual faith should never be 'forced' to believe otherwise, the same consideration should be afforded to them who do.With the amendment to the California Constitution looming over us, this 'distraction' will certainly become front-page news up to and long after the election in November. It simply is not going to go away.I will refrain from commenting further on your reference to 'abortion' as I do not desire to 'go there' today.

     
  • posted at 6:39 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    That's my annoyance with zealots of any sort, they just cannot accept there are others of any other religious faith. Someday those that are in the dominant position may not be, so it is important that we all safeguard the Constitution. It is your right to disagree with people and even hate them if you so chose. Just remember our rights have faded since 9/11 and that will imperil all of us in the long run. But I bet many will know who won American Idol and Survivor.

     
  • posted at 6:36 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    I just noticed the time and thought it was church time, yes tongue was in cheek. I don't care nor is it any of my business what you do on a religious basis, nor do you need to explain it to me. That's the beauty of America. We don't have people with guns coming to our doors and checking on us to make sure we are going to the church, work, or whatever, or that we are speaking ill of the government. Most of the world is just not so lucky.

     
  • posted at 6:32 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Girard, thanks for the correction, as stated I'm not of the Christian faith, so it was good to review them. I am just sick of this distraction. I truly believe America is at a crossroads and we are sinking, but it's not because of gay marriage and abortion. The rich have gotten so MUCH richer and the poor so much poorer. I've lost complete trust in our government. Today's paper even lists how the poor are really affected by inflation this time, which they weren't as in the past.

     
  • posted at 6:31 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater wrote, 'What are you doing blogging when you should be in church?'Wow! I missed this little gem. There you are attempting to quote the Bible to further your insistence that people should not judge others and then turn right around and judge me for not being in church. I hope that your tongue was planted firmly within your cheek when you posted that, although it is impossible to tell.How do you know I didn't attend an earlier service? How do you know that I don't attend 'church' through my television? How do you know that I don't worship God in my own home by reading His Word and praying to him in private?

     
  • posted at 6:28 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    For the record I voted twice for Bill Clinton but he and the repulican congress did unforgiveable damage when they gave China most favored nation trading status. That allowed the flood gates of cheap labor to kill us here. We can't work for $9 an hour and survive much less $1 an hour as they do in China. I could care less about the lie and impeachment, you will someday see that sin is mild in comparison to what they all agreed to with this trade pact.

     
  • posted at 6:26 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater, as you can probably tell, my intention was not to belittle you because of your error; I merely brought it to your attention.Of course you meant the passage in Matthew that states 'Judge not, lest ye be judged.' There are many others, but I really don't think we want to get off on this tangent. There are many learned theologians who disagree that these Biblical passages deny us the responsibility to 'judge' others. In short, they are presented for us to first look to ourselves before casting aspersions on anyone else.

     
  • posted at 6:24 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    just remember the shrub didn't raise taxes, he sold our soul to China. Most people have no idea why the fixed mortgage rate is so low. It's because China continues to buy our treasury notes and allows us to keep our credit rolling. We no longer have any sort of leverage with them, because they own about 55% or outstanding treasury notes. shrub has done more damage to us than many understand. But as a nation, we've sure been concerned about gay marriage and abortion for the last 7 years.

     
  • posted at 6:19 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    gay marriage and abortion, I believe it's because of unbridled greed from the capitalists who fund Washington politics and dictate our laws. Own own area of Stockton, foreclosure captial of the world, was caused greatly by greed. Wall Street was greedy for unrealistic returns and didn't bother to look at what was underneath those subprime loans, to the bankers who sold them in a packaged deal. No just keep worrying about abortion and gay marriage as China will someday pull the rug out from under us. Then you'll find out how valuable religious freedom is when it's gone.

     
  • posted at 6:15 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Those in 'power' keeps the masses stirred up with abortion and gay marriage and it keeps you off the Iraq war that was based on lies and cost us too many American lives, not to mention 2 trillion dollars. It keeps you away from demanding Wall Street commodity traders be forced to follow rules and not run oil prices into the stratosphere. Can you buy anything that is not made in China, what do we produce as Americans anymore? But those like Brian can keep on with their relgious dialogue while America's ship is sinking, but not because of

     
  • posted at 6:12 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    were as much of the English system of government also. What I'm saying is that our Constitution protects our freedom of religion, one religion cannot be allowed to dictate to all others who live here. The hysterical part of the whole gay marriage debate is that this group is a tiny, tiny part of society. There are just so many other things right now that are just much more important. Gas will hit $5 soon and the biggest employer is the US is Walmart that pays $9 an hour.

     
  • posted at 6:09 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    ok, wrong on that quote, but it caused me to review them again, which is a good thing to do on ocassion as the rules are good for anyone of any religion. I know judging is somewhere in the Bible as it pertains to just this sort of thing, but I am not a Bible scholar, so someone can help me out. What are you doing blogging when you should be in church? Brian are you in favor of a Sharia Law state for Muslims. We have been based on part on CHristian principals, but those laws were..

     
  • posted at 5:30 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    G74 Wrote: I must have missed that part. Where in the Ten Commandments does God insist that we must 'not judge?' "Good point Girard74. I may not be quite as polished on my writing skills as you.I do try.

     
  • posted at 5:28 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Shrubbeater Wrote: We are a nation of Christians, not a Christian nation. "You got that right. And this is why we should maintain the Christian foundation of this nation. To not maintain it and let it crumble becausea very small percentage of the population wants their way is selfish and obsurd and I won't have any part of this narcisism.

     
  • posted at 5:24 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater wrote, 'I think everyone has disregarded the 10 Commandments section. There was a reason God put "DO NOT JUDGE" in there.'I must have missed that part. Where in the Ten Commandments does God insist that we must 'not judge?'

     
  • posted at 5:20 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    My final comment on this section: I think everyone has disregarded the 10 Commandments section. There was a reason God put "DO NOT JUDGE" in there. I have seen more hate spewed from so called Christians because of a few lines in the Bible. If it truly is against the Hebrew God's will, then those who have violated will be punished by him. I just keep in mind that God made all of us and for a reason. If you have children do you love anyone of them less because they are different or maybe not up to your standards

     
  • posted at 5:03 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Brian, our great Constitution of the United States of America, or at least what's left of it after the Patriot Act, allows you this very right of freedom of speech. It also allows me the freedom of religion. I think many of us so called left lean liberals are just finally tired of the Christians believing they are the only religion that can and will be. I am not pro or anti gay marraige, but I believe that it cannot be denied b/c of your Christian religous beliefs. We are a nation of Christians, not a Christian nation.

     
  • posted at 3:46 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    It will be a cold day in hell when I am denied quoting scriptures in the biblethat may be offensive to gays.

     
  • posted at 3:44 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    Winston, It's ironic how those that scream the loudest about their free speech rights being voilated are the very ones who would be proponets of Jack Straw's law.Oh, what a tangled web the left weaves.

     
  • posted at 3:20 am on Sun, Jun 22, 2008.

    Posts:

    " U.K. Justice Minister Jack Straw has outlined plans for a new law criminalizing incitement of hatred against lesbian, gay or bisexual people. Those convicted of breaking the law could face a maximum sentence of seven years. " And so it goes. Soon the day will come here unless "tolerant" America wakes up where the Bible will be banned. Reading scripture like Lev 20:13 will be considered hate speech Priests and pastors will be arrested and imprisoned. Christians, Jews, and Muslims will have to go underground to practice their religion. Edmund Bruke said "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Many good people see no threat at all and therein lies most of the problem. Don't you think in hindsight the American Indian regrets letting that first covered wagon cross the Great Plains?

     
  • posted at 3:36 pm on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    Bob Matheis, Put that in your pipe and smoke it.If you have the courage you should contact Dennis Prager and arrange to have a debate with him on this issue or contact him on the phone when he is on the radio. Pragerradio.comYou might be quite surprised to find many of Prager's views are probably the same as yours, except for this issue. I know Ken Owen shares many of Prager's views. I've known Ken since I was in grade school and when I attended Century Assembly Church.

     
  • posted at 3:30 pm on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    You can get almost any policy approved by vast numbers of Americans by appealing to their goodness -- which is what the cause of same-sex marriage does. When the average American hears the word "intolerance," he jumps through hoops to avoid being associated with such an awful thing. Moreover, it takes a great deal of thought to understand why tolerance has nothing to do with whether we should change the definition of marriage and family. One can tolerate gay couples, move next door to them, invite them over for a barbecue, love them as fellow family members or just as fellow human beings, and still fight for the preservation of marriage as every civilization has known it.The third group of supporters of same-sex marriage is the religious Left. Their social values are generally identical to those of the secular Left, but they think of those values as religious. These Jews and Christians say they support same-sex marriage not despite their religious identity, but because of it.

     
  • posted at 3:28 pm on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    He also states: Proponents of same-sex marriage fall into three categories.One is the secular Left -- people who seek to end the dominance of Judeo-Christian values in American life. These individuals tend to be the leaders and among the most active supporters of same-sex marriage.They are animated by their fear and loathing of Bible-based Christians (and Jews) whom they regard as religious fanatics. Destroying the Judeo-Christian definition of marriage is one part of the secular Left's assault. Every vestige of Judeo-Christian America is targeted: public celebrations of Christmas, the mention of God in public schools, "In God We Trust" on our money, the use of the Bible at inaugurations, and much more.But the end of Judeo-Christian marriage would be by far the Left's biggest success in remaking America in its image.A second group consists of many well-meaning Americans who are not leftists and who do not yearn for the end of Judeo-Christian values. They simply believe that same-sex marriage is either the right thing to do or, even if wrong, not a big deal. Cont.

     
  • posted at 3:24 pm on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    According to Dennis Prager:There is nothing in mainstream Christianity or Judaism that supports same-sex marriage. There is nothing biblically supportive -- and there is much biblically opposed -- and there was not one major religious leader or thinker in Jewish or Christian history prior to the present generation who argued for same-sex marriage.Religious supporters of same-sex marriage have either substituted their own feelings for God, for the Bible, and for religious law or they have simply attached a cross or a yarmulke to their leftist politics.

     
  • posted at 3:12 pm on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    jess, so you disagree with George Washington that religon and morality are indespensible supports in society.Oh, Bob Matheis, this is for you too.

     
  • posted at 1:57 pm on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    Bob Matheis Wrote: It is about time with our culture and our current understanding of homosexuality. I have come to believe that it's not something one chooses; it's something that one discovers about themselves."Bob, I have to agree. Thank you for speaking out.

     
  • posted at 4:16 am on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    Bob Matheis Wrote:"It is about time with our culture and our current understanding of homosexuality. I have come to believe that it's not something one chooses; it's something that one discovers about themselves.Winston Wallace Wrote: These supports are now crumbling and what was once unthinkable will be the norm.Words will mean the opposite of what they once meant and the people will drown in a cesspool of moral relativism.The sewer line cracked and broke slowly as it ran into the river of morality and standards. Some could see and taste the stench but many never knew the difference between the two and find it puzzling that some still fight to save that river. "

     
  • posted at 3:33 am on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater... great name. I have to confess that I was a 2 time voter for the baby shrub. The first time I just voted republican as that is my party. The second time I fell for the republicans' "Fear" tactics. Stupid me. This time I am wide awake and paying attention.

     
  • posted at 3:32 am on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    Winston Wallace wrote on Jun 21, 2008 8:16 AM:Winston, Well Put.

     
  • posted at 3:16 am on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    With the legalization of homosexual marriage, public schools in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Textbooks, even in conservative states, will have to depict man/man and woman/woman relationships, and stories written for children as young as elementary school, or even kindergarten, will have to give equal space to homosexuals. In his September 19, 1796 Farewell Address to the nation, George Washington stated: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars." These supports are now crumbling and what was once unthinkable will be the norm.Words will mean the opposite of what they once meant and the people will drown in a cesspool of moral relativism.The sewer line cracked and broke slowly as it ran into the river of morality and standards. Some could see and taste the stench but many never knew the difference between the two and find it puzzling that some still fight to save that river.

     
  • posted at 2:40 am on Sat, Jun 21, 2008.

    Posts:

    Just another day in the Bible Belt: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/20/teacher.cross/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

     
  • posted at 6:02 pm on Fri, Jun 20, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater wrote, 'As my husband said, he watched the old man Bush say wait for Ohio and sure enough the electronic voting machines brought it in for shrub.'And this means what, exactly? Are you suggesting that the machines were tampered with to bring in the vote for Bush?For almost as long as I can remember Ohio has always been considered a pivotal state in national elections. To the dismissal of nearly all other states, Florida, Michigan and Ohio (and a few others) have always been the states to 'watch' on election night.After the 2000 election, Bush without question had the electoral votes necessary to be the 43rd President of the United States. No one denies that Gore received the popular vote, but as we all know it is the 'electoral' vote that matters. If this is a problem (which I believe it is) then the Constitution should be amended. Regardless, Florida was key then and after multiple recounts of that state's votes, Bush won albeit by the narrowest of margins.

     
  • posted at 4:50 pm on Fri, Jun 20, 2008.

    Posts:

    A funny thing I remember my father asking me what I thought about Al Gore and Baby Bush. I remember telling him that one didn't have a pulse and the other didn't have a brain. I look back and I would most certainly have gone for the one without a pulse. I truly believe that Gore was ripped off. As my husband said, he watched the old man Bush say wait for Ohio and sure enough the electronic voting machines brought it in for shrub.

     
  • posted at 4:45 pm on Fri, Jun 20, 2008.

    Posts:

    Sam, it's shrub eater as in george bush (shrub). I better be careful or Homeland Security might come knocking at my door. Shrub completely fooled the evangelical Christians into thinking that he could overturn abortion and ban gay marriage. I am from the Bible belt and people in my own family bought him hook, line, and sinker. I saw from the beginning what he was. I didn't like his father much either, but at least he was a man of some intellect and character. I can't believe American voted in a recovering alcoholic "C" student as president. We deserved better!

     
  • posted at 2:33 pm on Fri, Jun 20, 2008.

    Posts:

    OK shrubeater, I gotta ask... the blog name.. I love it. Do you eat shrubs??? come one.. the name... where did it come from.Me... sam... I am sam that sam I am. I picked the name just because I LOVE green eggs and ham.

     
  • posted at 2:07 pm on Fri, Jun 20, 2008.

    Posts:

    OTH, thank you for the kind words too, but what did I say that made you think that I am a man? I am not, I am a straight, white, middle-aged woman.

     
  • posted at 11:57 am on Fri, Jun 20, 2008.

    Posts:

    Homosexuality is, of course, not a new behavior. It has existed in practically all cultures and among all people, but usually in fewer numbers and in secrecy, not with an "in your face" attitude as it does in the United States now. Unfortunately this is the reality of the times we live in, especially in liberal states like Ca and Massachusetts. Gays, in an attempt to polish their image, constitute a very active and powerful lobby group. They have strong political and social ties and access to the elites of the society, especially in the US, including many members of Congress. The homosexuals have gained public acceptance for their behavior in a very short period of time. The homosexual's agenda is a very simple one to make their behavior acceptable as NORMAL, and in the process recruit more to their ranks. They have a sophisticated and multifaceted campaign to achieve their goals. They have arrived. Gay marriage is now a fact. Fundamental Christianity and Islam are in the forefront of speaking out against gay marriage but the former is branded as intolerant homophobes while the latter are all unjustly portrayed as terrorist or sympathetic to radical jihad.

     
  • posted at 3:47 pm on Thu, Jun 19, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubbeaterYou sound like a very wise and knowledgeable man, who grew up in a very loving and caring household May you continue in your knowledge and wisdom all the rest of your life.

     
  • posted at 1:22 am on Thu, Jun 19, 2008.

    Posts:

    I think its ironic, so many heterosexuals are opting out of marriage, preferring to live together. The argument being that its economically better. They have no problem raising children out of wedlock and do not even care about "morality" Now the gay community wants to be wed. They want the institution of marriage. The only good thing that may come from all of this, is perhaps the Gays can fight the unfair tax penalties that are placed on married couples. Since they are good lobbyist perhaps we can all benefit from some change. Or they may eventual question why they wanted this in the first place.

     
  • posted at 7:52 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    As I see it, a relatively small part of the gay community may very well have caused irreparable harm to the majority in their quest to have their lifestyle accepted. Like it or not, admit it or not, those who many label as 'homophobe' may very well have become that way not by those who quietly live their lives in harmony amongst straight people, but by the militant and extravagant behavior advanced by that small percentage of gays.Most people simply do not understand why there is a need to hold parades and other public exhibitions to celebrate any sexual preference, gay, straight or otherwise. Even here on this blog while there are many hateful opponents to same-sex marriage there are equally as many exhibiting the same hateful rhetoric to attack their heterosexual counterparts.Although I will be pilloried for this dialogue, I suggest that the best way to convince the voters of California that same-sex marriage is not harmful (thereby possibly soothing their fear) is to tone down the rhetoric. The louder and more militant the gay community becomes, the smaller their chances of prevailing in November. Unfortunately, it may be too late to do any good.

     
  • posted at 6:16 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater, your Mom sounds pretty cool. She sounds like a woman I would be proud to know.Just love.. that's it. When things hurt so bad that you cannot bear it, turn to the nearest person and just love.Life is way too short to hate.

     
  • posted at 5:53 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    As I see it, a relatively small part of the gay community may very well have caused irreparable harm to the majority in their quest to have their lifestyle accepted. Like it or not, admit it or not, those who many label as 'homophobe' may very well have become that way not by those who quietly live their lives in harmony amongst straight people, but by the militant and extravagant behavior advanced by that small percentage of gays.Most people simply do not understand why there is a need to hold parades and other public exhibitions to celebrate any sexual preference, gay, straight or otherwise. Even here on this blog while there are many hateful opponents to same-sex marriage there are equally as many exhibiting the same hateful rhetoric to attack their heterosexual counterparts.Although I will be pilloried for this dialogue, I suggest that the best way to convince the voters of California that same-sex marriage is not harmful (thereby possibly soothing their fear) is to tone down the rhetoric. The louder and more militant the gay community becomes, the smaller their chances of prevailing in November. Unfortunately, it may be too late to do any good.

     
  • posted at 5:20 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    tichmarie wrote 'You both need to take a civics lesson. The Court was not being "activist." That is just something people say when a court does something they don't like.'Yes, every county is now enforcing the law permitting same-sex marriage in California. It has already been opined that 'if' the proposed amendment to the California Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman passes in November, the same-sex marriages performed between now and then will remain valid.My question to those who are praising this court for reversing this law, will you be as equally magnanimous toward the majority of voters in California if they reverse this ruling by Constitutional amendment?

     
  • posted at 3:44 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    She did what she thought was her "Christian Duty". She never stood up in church and yelled AMEN and Halleujah so that everyone could hear, no she had nothing to prove to anyone here on earth, only to God. I hope that Mr. Owens has the pleasure of meeting my mother some day as I believe she is sitting at the side of God as she was as saintly as a human could be.

     
  • posted at 3:41 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    every month telling my mom he was hungry, she fed him. She had no harsh words for him either. When a friend the family came to our home asking mom to take in his small son for a while, she did, because the new mom was in the insane house for a while. She had no harsh words for them either, she just took care of that child until his mother was well again. My mother never said hateful things to anyone. She said things under her breath occassionaly, as she was not a saint.

     
  • posted at 3:37 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    Sam thank you for the kind comments, but I must tell you that I am a Buddhist, not a Christian. I am white and was raised by Christians. Let me inform those hatemongers what a REAL Christian is/was, my late mother. There was a young girl in the neighborhood who got pregnant at 16. Well, she went to have 3 kids, without a dad by the time she was 22. My mother never had a harsh word for her. When their food stamps ran out and the oldest was at our door on the 25th of

     
  • posted at 12:05 pm on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    I say love the one you're with and thank God every dayfor your life. Live hard and live well... and love lots. You want to condemn??? Look at yourself, but be gentle. You are only a human.If religion is not your thing, then be thankful for the fact that you have witnessed another sunrise. Life is too good to waste a breath on hate.

     
  • posted at 5:04 am on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mattheis: since when must the Bible be altered to fit into current culture. Is a fallen, finite, human reasoning superior to God's word? Is that what you would call "rightfully dividing the word of truth"?Culture is what should conform to God's will in our lives.By pursuing sinful lifestyles, we are telling God His word is in error. God is irrelevant, doesn't understand current culture, made a mistake.God is wrong.Homosexuality isn't a new subject, it's ancient, has always been an issue, and God has never condoned sin.As a Pastor, you have the highest responsilbility.How can you stand in judgement of God?

     
  • posted at 4:14 am on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    I guess I should jump off the nearest bridge since I cannot procreate. I mean, if I don't have one part of my "main drive" I must not have the other! LOL!

     
  • posted at 1:32 am on Wed, Jun 18, 2008.

    Posts:

    That's "waist" down. Hey, I was writing at 5:00 in the morning...

     
  • posted at 10:17 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:08 PM: the biggest law being violated in a gay relationship would be Darwins. An organisms main drive is to stay alive, and procreate. I read an article recently about an Marine who had been wounded in Iraq and was marrying the woman who had been his caregiver. This poor guy had basically lost everything from the waste down to an IED. The article said that the couple hoped to eventually adopt.I suppose you could argue that they are "violating Darwin's law" by wanting to celebrate their love but...

     
  • posted at 8:10 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    AAAHHHHH!!!!!.............there....now I feel better.

     
  • posted at 4:08 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Sam, you must admit, that the biggest law being violated in a gay relationship would be Darwins. An organisms main drive is to stay alive, and procreate.

     
  • posted at 3:53 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater Jun 17, 2008 8:32 PM..Awesome blog.

     
  • posted at 3:51 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    shrubeater said "Jesus was just so much more "Spoken like a REAL Christian. Thank you.

     
  • posted at 3:48 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Seems to me , everyone against gay marriage is basing it on their personal religious beliefs. In the bible it says "Thou shalt not kill." Why are these same people not fighting against the death penalty??I would love to hear, without using one's religious beliefs, why gay marriage is wrong. One cannot condemn someone based on his own religious beliefs, unless these beliefs are universally accepted.The only one you can condemn with your own personal religious beliefs is yourself. Not all believe the same as you.

     
  • posted at 3:44 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Shrubbeater, I agree. This law will not really affect me, or you, or anybody, except for the positive effect it will have on all of our gay friends in a committed relationship. People like Mr. Owen spend way too much of their lives worrying about what really amount to trivial matters in the big picture. God is big enough to handle this one in His own way, in His own time. He doesn't need Mr. Owens help.

     
  • posted at 3:32 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    If anyone could make a VALID argument on why gay marriage would affect my marriage, I am more than happy to listen. I can tell you what will affect MY marriage: adulterly by me or spouse; diabolical financial mayhem by me or spouse; and that's the 2 that would have the greatest impact. Jane and Jill married and living next door has ZERO impact on MY marriage until proven otherwise. If they run off with my spouse and spend all of our money, well then they will affect my marriage.

     
  • posted at 3:20 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    By the way Rev. Mattheis, 2 out of 3 coherent paragraphs ain't bad!

     
  • posted at 3:15 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Congrats to all the newlyweds today. Welcome to the world of the marriage penalty tax!

     
  • posted at 3:13 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Never mind, the page I got that info from was created in 1994. I was wondering how they would ever enforce it anyway. But I understand that is the best method of intercourse to assure your child will grow up to be a Lawyer.

     
  • posted at 3:13 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Cog, I'm pretty certain that Georgia's anti-sodomy laws were struck down in 1998. All of those other anti-sodomy laws would be invalid as a result of the supreme court case in 2003.

     
  • posted at 3:07 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Sodomy IS against the law in many states. In Georgia, it carries a prison sentence of up to 20 years. Some states it is permissible only between married couples. In Arkansas, 1 year in jail, $1000 fine, same sex only. Alabama 1year, $1000, married couples exempt. Sodomy is also against the law in Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts(really!), Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Virginia, Utah, and Tennessee. Look it up!

     
  • posted at 3:06 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Has anyone ever seen Mr. Owen's voter guide? He seems completely preoccupied with sex, human reproduction, and "the war on Christmas". No mention or concern at all regarding poverty, homelessness, torture, genocide, or war. Somehow, I think Jesus would have different priorities.

     
  • posted at 2:57 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    I know that Mr. Owens is frequently heard voicing his opinion against something, but what does he and his church do to minister to the community? I'm not being fasicious, but would like to know. Do you help young single moms who kept their babies with daycare, diapers, a supporting hand? Do you stop and ask the homeless bum on Sac St if you can help? I believe our modern "Christians" having gotten away from the service to humanity. When I think Christian I think: against gay marriage and want to ban abortion. Jesus was just so much more

     
  • posted at 2:57 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    cogito, those ideas are also attributed to Aristotle in 'Ethics'.I read an exerpt with my class and had them discuss it.

     
  • posted at 2:54 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    voter, i stand corrected. my apologies, you are correct.'By 2002, 36 states had repealed all sodomy laws or had them overturned by court rulings. The remaining anti-homosexual sodomy laws have been invalidated by the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision Lawrence v. Texas'

     
  • posted at 2:51 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    How about this quote voter: "Any man who is under 30 and is not a liberal, has no heart; any man who is over 30 and is not a conservative, has no brains" Winston Churchill. What makes this one of my favorite quotes, is that conservatism is associated with a thinking, while liberalism is associated only with emotions. LOL!

     
  • posted at 2:46 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    voter, actually i do believe sodomy is against the law in some states. problem is there is no single defintion of sodomy. in one or more southern state, sodomy includes consensual heterosexual oral sex and is illegal.

     
  • posted at 2:39 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Shrubbeater, you couldn't believe someone said something stupid on The View? I've never seen 5 minutes go by on that show without someone saying something stupid.

     
  • posted at 1:34 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Hey dogs4you, FYI, sodomy is not against the law ANYWHERE in the USA.

     
  • posted at 1:24 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    How wonderful and happy you must be, due to a 4-3 decession by the Stupid Court, your free to carry on what you have been doing all along. The voters said no to you, the Court said yes, now the "gay thing" will once again come up for a vote, if the voters say no again will that void your "marrage" licence? Other than a piece of paper, what do you have now that you didn`t have before? BTW, sodomy is against the law.

     
  • posted at 1:19 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    I think "uneducated hicks" believed that Shrub could overturn Roe V Wade and they voted for him. I find it amazing that some "Americans" think that life started and stopped with Jesus. I cound't blieve that the African American host of The View actually thought humans have only been in existence for a couple of thousand years. People just don't pay attention in school. The No Child Left Behind was part and parcel for more dumbing down. It makes it easier to repeat the lies and have imbiciles believe them.

     
  • posted at 12:56 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    That John Stuart Mill quote is one of my long standing favorites. LOL

     
  • posted at 12:53 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Especially amusing today was the use of the word "cosmopolitan" as an insult. I've often heard "intellectual" used disparagingly by the same crowd. Makes you wonder--if smart, well traveled people are "bad", does that make uneducated hicks good?

     
  • posted at 12:50 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    I like these two...Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives. John Stuart Mill (English exponent of Utilitarianism, ethical theorist, Philosopher, Economist and Logician. 1806-1873)"Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber. Plato

     
  • posted at 12:49 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and overThink of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over Joseph GoebbelsMake the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it Adolf Hitler

     
  • posted at 12:48 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Thanks, jeff and tichmarie. Well said, both of you.

     
  • posted at 12:41 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Gio, Mazie, et al., do me a favor, go to a college, ANY college, and takea) a civics and/or gov't/poly sci classb) an english/critical thinking classc) a class in logicand hey, while your at it...d) a cultural anthropology or ancient history class.tich... word.

     
  • posted at 12:39 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Gio, as I read this, tich answered every one of your comments, using level-headed reason. You, however, immediately stoop to GOP-Rovian tactics of repeating buzz-words and phrases that arouse fear and distrust, eventhough they are at best a mis-use of the word and at worst a bald-face lie. If you repeat a lie often enough, the people will believe it (read: iraq linked to 9/11) and if you're going to lie, lie big, because the people won't believe that the gov't can lie that big, so the'll believe the lie (read: Hitler/Goebbels).

     
  • posted at 12:35 pm on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Can LNS someday print the Constitution of the United States of America? I think some people may have been busy reading another 'book' when that lesson was taught. If the will of the people want change, an amendment must be added to the Constitution. A judge should not interpret a law for how people voted, but if it's constitutional. We will see what happens this fall. I think a great many of us 'straight' people are ready to vote yes, just to get this maddes to stop.

     
  • posted at 11:37 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Aimee wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:25 PM:"I was referring to the intent of the framers that the Constitution should constitute the supreme law of the land. As precedence goes, it is the line of cases or case, decided prior to the one at bar, that is controlling or persuasive. The line of cases, or case, was also subject to the interpretation of the Court."Understood re: what you were referring to. And yes, the decision was based on prior court precedent. Such is the way our courts have operated since (almost) the birth of this nation.

     
  • posted at 11:33 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Aimee wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:29 PM:" That's the rub here--the voters attempted to amend the California Constitution but the court decided that this particular amendment was in violation of civil rights of gays. ficult issue with so many layers to it. "No, Aimee. This was NOT a constitutional amendment. The Court overruled a regular old law passed by the voters via an initiative. The Court did NOT overrule a constitutional amendment. This was never brought in the form of a constitutional amendment until just recently (the new ballot initiative).

     
  • posted at 11:29 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    That's the rub here--the voters attempted to amend the California Constitution but the court decided that this particular amendment was in violation of civil rights of gays. So, back to the drawing board again, back to the polls; shall we end up in court again after November? So, really, this is such a difficult issue with so many layers to it.

     
  • posted at 11:25 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Although it is useful to note the opinions of more contemporary political figures in society, I was referring to the intent of the framers that the Constitution should constitute the supreme law of the land. As precedence goes, it is the line of cases or case, decided prior to the one at bar, that is controlling or persuasive. The line of cases, or case, was also subject to the interpretation of the Court.

     
  • posted at 11:08 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Aimee,Also, the voters in California can amend the constitution by a simple majority vote, and have done so many times. So, yes, I would say the constitution (both in concept and reality) is intended to express the ultimate will of the people.But, in all seriousness, though I disagree with them to some extent, I appreciate your comments. It's nice to be able to have an intelligent civil disagreement.

     
  • posted at 11:04 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Aimee wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:58 PM:" The framers recognized that the Constituion was the supreme and ultimate law of the land, even stating such in the document itself, not that it was the "ultimate expression of the people". This line of thinking would render our system of checks and balances nearly worthless. "Not according to our former President, Ronald Reagan: see http://www.fed-soc.org/resources/id.54/default.asp"Hamilton, Jefferson, and all the Founding Fathers recognized that the Constitution is the supreme and ultimate expression of the will of the American people." Perhaps he was wrong.

     
  • posted at 11:01 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Also, Giovanina, I called your ideas un-American and unpatriotic because you seem to want to quash voices of dissent and institute your personal religious beliefs as the rule of law. Thats not what this country is about. Re your "nanny state, che followers" comments that is just ridiculous stuff you throw up to scare people. Give me something to back up your statements, please.

     
  • posted at 11:00 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Giovanina:A few questions:What comments of yours did I ignore? I tried to address each and every one. Point one out for me.What are my socialist ideals? Please list the statements I made that are socialist.Also, my mother, who was raised on a farm in rural California thinks same sex couples should be allowed to marry. (BTW, she believes in God, she is a Republican, she believes in America and freedom.) How are her ideals somehow cosmopolitan? She doesnt come from or live in a big city. What do you mean by cosmopolitan?

     
  • posted at 10:58 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    The framers recognized that the Constituion was the supreme and ultimate law of the land, even stating such in the document itself, not that it was the "ultimate expression of the people". This line of thinking would render our system of checks and balances nearly worthless.

     
  • posted at 10:55 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Further, the Justices may want to interpret the Constitution in different ways--shall they view the provisions using a strict constuctionist view or should view the provisions in light of recent history? It is open to the different views of each of the Justices.

     
  • posted at 10:55 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Aimee:The founding fathers recognized that the Constitution was the supreme and ultimate expression of the will of the people. And, it is not just a gatekeeper to limit the powers the state and federal government can wield, but also a limit on iniative made laws. Otherwise, you could pass a law by initiative in California that says, "No women are allowed to vote." This would conflict with the constitution and so even if a majority of the voters passed it, the court would have to strike it down.

     
  • posted at 10:54 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Aimee wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:46 PM:" ***. Therefore, in this context, it does not consitute the will of the people, but the will of the Court in which the provision is interpreted. "And the precedence used for the foundation of this decision was.....?That is the problem, it was not precedence based, it was social activism based, which is not interpreting past precedence.

     
  • posted at 10:50 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    So I call you on your Socialist/Cosmopolitan ideals, and you directly call me unAmerican and unpatriotic? LOL How pathetic. It is obvious that you don't even know how to keep this nation going, just tear it down. You totally ignored my comments. So that tells me a lot about you. You haven't debunked anything. You have shown no facts to even support your "debunk", and your talking points come from the Che followers and other "cosmopolitans" in this nanny state. California is a state of the U.S. It is not it's own Socialist country.

     
  • posted at 10:46 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    The Constitution, with exception for amendments to the Constitution where voters approved such amendments, does not constitute the "will of the people"; it acts as a gatekeeper, limiting the powers the state and federal government can wield in relation to the rights that we are afforded as citizens by the application a balancing test (also Court-created). The Court is the medium by which this document is interpreted. Therefore, in this context, it does not consitute the will of the people, but the will of the Court in which the provision is interpreted.

     
  • posted at 10:41 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    And, also, I believe the first childish name calling appeared here:Giovanina wrote: You sound like one of those morons that call patriots racists because they want the border secured. "You don't know me, Giovanina. But I know this much about you: the fact that I can debunk, yes, debunk your arguments, and demonstrate how ultimately unpatriotic and unAmerican they are pisses you off. And THAT is why you stoop to childish name calling.

     
  • posted at 10:36 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Giovanina wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:18 PM:Who died and made you the judge of "hate"? That is another secular cosmopolitan excuse. You sound like one of those morons that call patriots racists because they want the border secured. "I didn't say she hated anything, just that she had the freedom to do so in this country. Also, what is it with you and the word cosmopolitan. Do you know where I'm from? I'm from Lodi. And can you explain why "hate" would be a "secular cosmopolitan excuse"? Excuse for what? Doesn't make sense.

     
  • posted at 10:32 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Giovanina wrote: The concept of marriage is between a man and a woman, and that is how the word was written, defined, and confirmed by the State. How far back in history do you think I should look to find a gay's version of marriage? You are wrong in both your factual assumptions and your reasoning. Factual assumptions: marriage has not always been b/t one man and one woman. There were same-sex marriages in ancient Rome & Greece. Reasoning: just because something has "always" been done a certain way doesn't make it right (slavery?).

     
  • posted at 10:29 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Giovanina wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:12 PM:" tichmarie wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:54 PM:How is shoving your opinions down someone's throat, debunking facts? Giovania, you really are against the fundamental rights, aren't you (free speech, freedom of religion)? I'm not allowed to express a dissenting opinion in a civil manner? I haven't heard Science8c or you explain how polygamy or incestuous or interspecies marriage would become law. Since you seem to think my "opinion" about whether this could happen is wrong, why don't you explain how it is wrong. Show me what you know.

     
  • posted at 10:26 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Ack, typos again. Meant to say freedom of religion. And, also, I don't know where you get this stuff like "too many young Che followers." Do you know these people? Because I haven't met any.

     
  • posted at 10:23 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Giovanina wrote: " Well it is very easy to spot the "there are no rules" nation destroyers."I haven't seen anyone here but Mazie and Dyan and Science8c suggest that there should be no rules. More importantly, you forget the basic premise that this nation was founded on -- freedom of religious. In attempting to enact your religious belifs as the rule of law (as they do in Islamic countries) it is YOU (and Mazie) and not others who are the nation destroyers. Drag yourselves out of the dogma and THINK ladies.

     
  • posted at 10:18 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mazie and Giovanina,You both need to take a civics lesson. The Court was not being "activist." That is just something people say when a court does something they don't like. Do either of you know what role the Court is suppose to play in our society? They are suppose to review laws to insure that they are constitutional. And, they did not "overrule" the will of the people. The constitution is the ultimate will of the people. Meaning that not even the almighty "majority" can pass a law if it violates the constitution.

     
  • posted at 10:18 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    tichmarie wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:13 PM:" Mazie,If you believe in the Bible, that is fine. You are allowed to do that. You are also allowed to disapprove of, hate or otherwise condemn same-sex couples, if you wish (although that Bible you follow says LOVE thy neighbor). Who died and made you the judge of "hate"? That is another secular cosmopolitan excuse. You sound like one of those morons that call patriots racists because they want the border secured.

     
  • posted at 10:15 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mazie wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:10 PM:" Giovanina: i am starting to wonder why anyone bothers to vote. Some idiot comes along and overrules our vote. We will just have to wait and see what happens in Nov.We have too many young Che followers in California. But they don't vote, they like to see their Socialist/cosmoplitan viewpoint all over the net. They are NOT the majority,

     
  • posted at 10:14 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Sorry, for the typo -- meant to say "Islamic."

     
  • posted at 10:13 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mazie,If you believe in the Bible, that is fine. You are allowed to do that. You are also allowed to disapprove of, hate or otherwise condemn same-sex couples, if you wish (although that Bible you follow says LOVE thy neighbor). What is not allowed is having the government institute your personal religious beliefs as the rule of law (this is done in some Islamice countries -- and the results are often unpleasant). That's unAmerican, my friend. And, as for your "if same sex marriage is allowed, why have any laws," well, that is just silly.

     
  • posted at 10:12 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    tichmarie wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:54 PM:" And, also, Science8c, I don't recall calling you any names -- merely debunking your argument. But, if you want to accuse me of doing so without any justification, feel free."How is shoving your opinions down someone's throat, debunking facts? The concept of marriage is between a man and a woman, and that is how the word was written, defined, and confirmed by the State. How far back in history do you think I should look to find a gay's version of marriage? Not there, sorry. Pathetic cosmopolitans.

     
  • posted at 10:10 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Giovanina: i am starting to wonder why anyone bothers to vote. Some idiot comes along and overrules our vote. We will just have to wait and see what happens in Nov.

     
  • posted at 10:07 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Not if i marry my dog, my sister or any other female species. I will be right there with everyone else LOL.

     
  • posted at 10:06 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Well it is very easy to spot the "there are no rules" nation destroyers.The State had already spoke and we the majority voted. Then an activist judge abused his powers and overruled the State, State being the people. Was this the activist judge with the porn site I saw on the news?So one nutty judge is going to overrule the majority? lol the majority has had it with this "there are no rules, cosmopolitan" attitudes. This issue is not going away any time soon. After Nov, they will be revoked.

     
  • posted at 9:26 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mazie wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:57 PM:" Then everyone can go to Hell when they die."No, Mazie, not you. You alone will be seated at the right hand of God.

     
  • posted at 8:57 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Voter: it is not about marrying your dog either. But if people of the same sex can marry, when that is truly against God's laws, why can't you marry your own sister, brother or the family dog? I mean, if we are going to change the laws, let's change them all. Who cares? Then everyone can go to Hell when they die. I see no difference between gays marrying and people marrying their animals or their family members. It is all wrong IMHO. I guess it is all in how you were raised.

     
  • posted at 8:54 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    And, also, Science8c, I don't recall calling you any names -- merely debunking your argument. But, if you want to accuse me of doing so without any justification, feel free.

     
  • posted at 8:51 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Science8c--that article has nothing to do with brothers and sisters marrying. What's your point?

     
  • posted at 8:44 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Gee...I wonder if I could legally marry my dog???? She is a female WOO HOO! Tich: the Bible says that a man should not lay with another man. I don't care if it is the old testament. Show me in the New Testament where it says being gay is OK.

     
  • posted at 8:42 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    You may wish to suspend your name calling long enough to read the article in this link:http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/04/columns/fl.grossman.incest.04.09/

     
  • posted at 8:20 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Also, re: genetics being a "smokescreen," I'm not sure you have it quite right there. See this article and the sources cited therein: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

     
  • posted at 8:08 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Science8c:Continued from above re: reasons the state could use to justify preventing incestuous and polygamous marriages:Incestuous marriages:1) the risk of sexual abuse (the most frequently reported type of incest is father-daughter incest so much with the homos being the child molesters!) and 2) the increased risk of genetic defects (a smaller gene pool leads to risks of birth defects and other health problems which is why purebred dogs are known to have so many health issues). As for polygamy, the most common form of polygamy is one man with many wives (as is reflected in the Bible). Not only does this lead to power-dynamic issues within the marital relationship and society, it leads to 1) a shortage of women (which leads to booting young boys out of the community see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_boys_%28polygamy%29); and 2) and a financial burden on society (as instead of having 2 parents to support the offspring of one union, you have 1 whose resources are split between multiple families welfare anyone?).

     
  • posted at 8:06 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Science8c:You have it backwards. The "strong justifiable reasons" are what the STATE has to show to limit conduct -- not what a party discriminated against has to show in order to alleviate discrimination. I agree that someone is usually "discriminated against" when the state limits conduct. In this instance, the state could provide no legally justifiable reason to exclude same-sex couples from marriage equality. As for strong justifiable reasons the state could use to prevent incest, there are several. For space purposes, see my next post.

     
  • posted at 7:58 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    science8c--I agree with fairiestitches; it's almost inconceivable that someone of your ilk would self identify with the term "science."

     
  • posted at 7:52 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Science8c--incest is a crime.

     
  • posted at 7:42 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    What "strong, justifiable reasons" are there for allowing two people of the same gender to marry, but two people who are brother and sister not. Genetics is a smoke screen. Somebody is always "discriminated" against whenever there are conditions on behavior.Whichever group seems to have the loudest voices seems to be the rule.

     
  • posted at 7:14 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    dyan wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:02 PM:" When are they going to allow me to marry my sister?"You're in the wrong state, if that is truly your desire.

     
  • posted at 7:04 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Dyan,I fear that I must repeat myself for your benefit:It seems like you are raising the "this will lead to incestuous marriages" argument -- a fine strawman argument if ever there was. If so, you need to sit down and learn about the system of constitutional review -- how a state can justify a law that prevents certain things (polygamy, incestuous marriages, etc.) from occuring without violating the constitution. I'll keep it simple, there are strong justifiable reasons for the state to prevent these things (aside from fears about gentic defects). It really is that simple.And because of that, the argument that marriage equality for same-sex couples will lead to polygamy, incestuous marriage, etc. is a losing argument. It's fine and dandy to throw it around if you want to scare people, but please don't kid yourself that the argument has any merit.

     
  • posted at 7:02 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    When are they going to allow me to marry my sister? My civil rights are being violated!!

     
  • posted at 7:01 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Science8c:It seems like you are raising the "this will lead to incestuous marriages" argument -- a fine strawman argument if ever there was. If so, you need to sit down and learn about the system of constitutional review -- how a state can justify a law that prevents certain things (polygamy, incestuous marriages, etc.) from occuring without violating the constitution. I'll keep it simple, there are strong justifiable reasons for the state to prevent these things (aside from fears about gentic defects). It really is that simple.And because of that, the argument that marriage equality for same-sex couples will lead to polygamy, incestuous marriage, etc. is a losing argument. It's fine and dandy to throw it around if you want to scare people, but please don't kid yourself that the argument has any merit.

     
  • posted at 6:55 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mazie,I though only God decided who goes to hell. You must be pretty powerful (not to mention arrogant to think that you can) read his mind about who is going to hell. If I remember my Bible study lessons correctly, arrogance like yours is definitely a sin.People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

     
  • posted at 6:53 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Apparently you haven't kept up with science. Incestrual children have only slightly elevated chances of defects. Certainly ,scientifically speaking, a better chance than a child conceived(?) by two members of the same sex. Without prying, your son isn't from this union, my statement about marriage being consecrated for the conception and stability of raising children is not part of this equation. You don't think private vows of fidelity and sharing finances and domiciles is enough?

     
  • posted at 6:51 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Congrats to all of the happy couples! And, some thoughts for the naysayers:Marriage has not always been defined as one man and one woman; check the bible - they had multiple wives. Also, marriage has not always been a religious institution - check ancient Rome/Greece - it started out as and has almost always been (at its heart) a civil contract addressing property rights. Plus, if we are really interested in maintaining "traditional marriage," as it has been defined throughout most of history, then we will need to revoke a married woman's right to own property. Throughout most of history, the wife became the property of the husband upon marriage and could not own any property herself. Further, marriage equality won't lead to legalizing polygamy or inter-species marriage (the constitutional standards of review won't allow that - and it hasn't happened yet in any of the states or countries which allow s/s marriage). Moreover, the court did not "overturn" the will of the people; the constitution is the ultimate expression of the will of the people - and the court did its job by interpreting the constitution.

     
  • posted at 6:19 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Its about time We recognize gay couples and allow them to have the same luxury any other couple would have. TO spend the rest of their lives together, MARRIED! BEST WISHES!!

     
  • posted at 6:08 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Science 8c - Are you trying to tell me that my upcoming gay marriage isn't permanent and stable enough to raise my son? Especially since we all know how permanent and stable heterosexual marriages are? You think we fought so hard for our right to get married just so we can get divorced? Seriously!

     
  • posted at 6:04 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Science 8c- I can't beleive you have a user id with the name science in it yet you dont realize that the reason incest is not an okayed practice is because it affects the health and well being of the children born from the marriage! Incest is equal to birth defects and physical abnormalities. Gay people dont have children born with webbed fingers and toes, but daddy's who hurt their daughters do!

     
  • posted at 5:58 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Aimee, I don't think you realize how much your post sounds like something written by genteel southern ladies during the civil rights era. "We think 'the coloreds' should have good jobs and schools. We just don't think the courts should be able to change our southern traditions of separate, but equal." Aimee--separate legal status is not equal!

     
  • posted at 5:37 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    While I disagree with Mazie that these individuals are going to go to hell, I am against gay couples being allowed to marry. However, I think a better solution would be for the federal government to recognize civil unions so that these people can enjoy the same financial benefits as hetero married couples. Traditionally, marriage has been between a man and a woman. I don't think the court should have to power to change this long-standing tradition without the consent of the People. We will see what happens in November when we are allowed to vote on this issue. It will be, to say the least, interesting.

     
  • posted at 5:21 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    I didn't know you couldn't spend the rest of your life loving someone and living together without marriage. Owning property together can be accomplished without marriage. Vowing to stay together always? There are all kinds of contracts that don't involve marriage. Am I missing something?

     
  • posted at 5:17 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    I don't understand why brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, mothers and sons can't be married. Isn't this a violation of THEIR civil rights?I don't care if they have a Domestic Partnership, but that is not marriage. Marriage has to do with the sanctioning of permanent, stable relationships in which to raise children.

     
  • posted at 5:15 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    I am sooo excited! Thank you California for finally allowing me to spend the rest of my life with the person I love! It is finally official and we are so happy you are finally ready to embrace your overwhelmingly large gay community in this state. We have been here crying out to be noticed for years. Thank you, thank you, thank you for your support. Thank you for not letting the conservative hypocritical hate spill out onto the decision that you made for us! We were all tired of having to pay extra to hold our weddings in different countries and a different state! We love you Cali!

     
  • posted at 4:40 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Best wishes and a lifetime of happiness to those getting married!

     
  • posted at 4:21 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mazie wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:36 AM:" i don't hate anyone . . . they will burn in Hell. Period."I'm not sensing the love here, Mazie. It may come as a shock to you, but many other Christians do not hold this view. Further, most citizens of the world adhere to other beliefs or none at all. Wouldn't it seem silly if a Hindu suggested that you might be reborn as an intestinal parasite as retribution for your self-righteous and judgmental ways? You are entitled to your beliefs, but hurling them as threats to total strangers will not change anyone's view and certainly not anyone's sexual orientation.

     
  • posted at 4:20 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    "Deblaw" - how Christian (or whatever sect you proclaim as a believer in God) of you to spew hatred along with epithets. No doubt you will end up in the same place you wish all gay people to go. It still amazes me that "believers" think that they can say and do anything as long as they repent (and I doubt they truly repent - saying, "God forgive me for I have sinned," just doesn't cut it!). I think God has a special plan for hypocrites and it doesn't include heaven.

     
  • posted at 4:17 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Its sad that the sacrament of marrage is made such a mockery, we voted against this and the supreme court decided to override our wishes and o.k it. God Have Mercy on us all.

     
  • posted at 4:13 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Well thank you papercut. You have a wonderful day.

     
  • posted at 3:36 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    papercut: i am only trying to make them aware of what they are up against. i don't hate anyone, but thanks for judging me LOL. I want them to know that if they do not repent, they will burn in Hell. Period. God loves everyone, even the sinners, and will forgive them if they repent.

     
  • posted at 3:05 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    Mazie, I'll see you in hell, haters go there, too. And sam, god bless you, you're always so cool and level headed. If these blogs had more opinions and common sense like you, those who are so full of hatred toward those who don't think the same twisted way they do are already in their own hell.

     
  • posted at 2:18 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    YAWN!!!!

     
  • posted at 2:09 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    I love the 90 year old couple they showed on the news who were finally able to marry.To all of you getting married today Congratulations and Peace Out.

     
  • posted at 12:45 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    These people are going to go to Hell. Homosexuality is a sin, plain and simple. Remember Sodom and Gomorrah!

     
  • posted at 12:45 am on Tue, Jun 17, 2008.

    Posts:

    The beginning of the end of marriage as it was intended to be. I have no respect for the California Supreme Court. I hope the people will overturn this horrible decision by this most liberal corrupt court. I am not holding my breath though.

     
Readers Choice Awards 2014

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Featured Events

CREATE AN EVENT

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists