8: The Mormon Proposition

[FuzzyBee]

Are there other reasons I am against this opposing group? Not in particular, no. I have other issues with the LDS church in terms of behaving unethically in the past, but this is true of many if not most human institutions.

I've said repeatedly that I don't support lying to get votes, no matter who does it. I don't see any backpeddling, inconsistency or hypocrisy here. Sorry, but assuming that I tolerate lies that support a cause I believe in IS a lame argument. According to that standard, I can make the exact same argument any time ANYONE calls out a person or group for lying about ANYTHING. You're basically saying, "so what if they lied. Your side lies too. Neener neener neener."

Just because that's what you hear doesn't mean that's what I'm saying. I'm saying you're a hypocrite for being against a group solely for this reason, but can overlook it for groups who espouse positions you also endorse. Please note that I admit the last half of this sentence is a presumption on my part, but I'm basing it on statements you yourself have made in this thread. I suspect you may need to find another reason to be against the support this group has given to those that oppose Proposition 8.

I sense a theme in today's P&N. In one thread, we have people arguing that war crimes, including genocide, are just fine because after all, in war, "everyone does it" anyway, and now we have someone arguing, so what they lied, everyone else does it, including people you support.

You really don't understand what I'm saying, do you? Either that, or you're really throwing out a big strawman in the form of "war crimes" and "genocide".

 

[Homerboy]

Where did you get this information? Maybe you should ask the guys you play basketball with whether they were told/directed/instructed to donate to established entities by the LDS church. In my experience, the LDS church does not tell it's members to donate to any specific entity. I heard messages about protecting the sanctity of marriage, but nothing like "Go donate to Protectmarriage.com".

I got the information from the documentary that started this whole thread.

Honestly people, both sides of the fence in this thread are HORRIBLE. You don't even ready statements before you respond to them...just see and har what you want, then call the otherside stupid. God partisan politics are what ruined an incredible country.

 

[woolfe9999]

Just because that's what you hear doesn't mean that's what I'm saying. I'm saying you're a hypocrite for being against a group solely for this reason, but can overlook it for groups who espouse positions you also endorse. Please note that I admit the last half of this sentence is a presumption on my part, but I'm basing it on statements you yourself have made in this thread. I suspect you may need to find another reason to be against the support this group has given to those that oppose Proposition 8.



You really don't understand what I'm saying, do you? Either that, or you're really throwing out a big strawman in the form of "war crimes" and "genocide".

If I didn't fully understand your point, it's because you purposefully hid the ball. If you want to call me a hypocrit, then come out and say it. Don't leave me to conjecture as to what your point really is. At any rate, I had guessed that hypocrisy was at least one of your points, as I mentioned it previously. Anyway, when you say that this point is a presumption, you certainly got that right. You say it is based on my comments in the thread, but you don't really have anything in particular to back up your allegation of hypocrisy. You are just ASSuming that I tolerate lies when told by people I support.

- wolf

 

[MacFatty]

A browse through wikipedia points out many of these factors.

The online encyclopedia that anyone can edit.....
I always quote Wikipedia so that way I'm never wrong.

 

[Homerboy]

Originally Posted by Drako A browse through wikipedia points out many of these factors. The online encyclopedia that anyone can edit..... I always quote Wikipedia so that way I'm never wrong.

Not only are you never wrong, but you're also never right!

 

[Drako]

The online encyclopedia that anyone can edit.....
I always quote Wikipedia so that way I'm never wrong.

Yeah yeah yeah. Wikipedia sucks, everyone knows this .

But it is still a useful place to start looking for information about a lot of topics. The OP apparently did little to no research on the topic before posting, so I pointed to a decent place to start looking.

 

[FTM0305]

You don't think that countless commercials, speaches, flyers, demonstrations etc affect people and their decisions?

How is this any different from any other law that was pass, change in political climate ever made, or even the no one prop 8 side?

Millions of dollars have been spent on both sides.

the thing I find "hogwash" is the whole legal system that put the up for debate. If the state just didn't define marriage or have laws requiring it be taught in school. Furthermore, if the state just called every legal matrimony a "civil union"we wouldn't have this debate.

The whole debate is over a word. A word which religious institutions have been using for years.

California has rights for gay individuals including civil unions that have all the perks of a "marriage."

This whole debate is about gay advocates forcing acceptance unto those that view it as a deviations from social norms.

Has no one seen the last episodes of Escaflowne or Neon Genesis Evangelion? The Japanese animators at least understand that not everyone can have the desired world they want. You can't force a people to accept something they don't want. If you push, you push them into conflict that starts with words and continues to blood shed through escalation of force. Arizona voted for tougher immigration laws, because to them illegal immigrate with cause them some sort of ruin. Is that necessarily true? Its a moot point of an answer because its their perspective that its true.

Posting anti LDS documentary doesn't make it fact. It just shows how narrow minded you are to say that the church had that much influence over people.

African Americans generally don't like gay people. Surprised? Don't be, thanks to them coming out to vote for President Obama, prop 8 was passed. Racial minorities do not accept the argument of gay right activist piggy backing off of the rights they gained. Its apples and oranges.

Name one right that same sex couples gain from this pursuit of tearing down prop 8? "Right to marry" Is just the right to use a word, because civil unions carry the same legal weight as any other marriage.

-Former California Citizen and LDS member.

 

[MacFatty]

To FTM0305:
You do not illustrate your points well because half of what you are writing is grammatically so horrible, that you can get more than one meaning out of what was written. You did no one justice with that post. Anything you may have said that made any sense is lost. Not trying to pick a fight, just saying, maybe a proof-read, before clicking post, is in order.

 

[MacFatty]

Wikipedia doesn't suck. It is great if you are looking for information that is best gathered from other people. Game profiles, reviews and other opinions. Looking for facts I would start with Google and pick and choose *carefully* websites from there.
As far as the OP, it didn't really ask any question other than if anyone saw the movie. Everyone interjected his or her opinions from there. I must say I haven't seen the movie and may or may not view it. The main debate points seem to be whether or not campaign advertising has an effect. It was pointed out, in an earlier post, that it in fact does have an effect. Otherwise advertising wouldn't exist. This is true of all advertising whether it is political or Coke/Pepsi (Neither btw...Mountain Dew. Opinion not fact). That is the whole point of advertising (or supposed point); to inform and/or affect opinions. Voting is entirely based on a person's opinion of something or someone.
Attacking one another is just plain ignorant.

 

[Craig234]

the thing I find "hogwash" is the whole legal system that put the up for debate. If the state just didn't define marriage or have laws requiring it be taught in school. Furthermore, if the state just called every legal matrimony a "civil union"we wouldn't have this debate.

The whole debate is over a word. A word which religious institutions have been using for years.

You are welcome to your utopian notion of how it should work. Until it works that way, which is a separate issue, discrimination is wrong. Marriage equality is needed until that happens.

So what if religious instituions have used the word? It has multiple meanings, both secular and various meanings within religions.

The secular meaning needs to not be discriminatory against gays. The religious meanings don't change.

California has rights for gay individuals including civil unions that have all the perks of a "marriage."

If they did, which they don't, it's still a message to gays that they're second-class and not equal that they can't have 'the word'.

This whole debate is about gay advocates forcing acceptance unto those that view it as a deviations from social norms.

Yes, just as ending segregation was 'forcing acceptance' onto those whites who views blacks as undesirable to have near them, same with inter-racial marriage.

The bottom line is it's YOU who are WRONGING with discrimination innocent people, denying them rights for reasons you cannot back up except for 'they're you're opinions'.

Gays aren't forcing ANYTHING on you except the requirement that you can't wrongfully discriminate against THEM.

The arrogance and blindness of the bigots is amazing - you are the one denying others rights and you are the 'victim' here.

Has no one seen the last episodes of Escaflowne or Neon Genesis Evangelion? The Japanese animators at least understand that not everyone can have the desired world they want. You can't force a people to accept something they don't want. If you push, you push them into conflict that starts with words and continues to blood shed through escalation of force.

Congratulations on your generic argument against every civil rights issue, ever.

You're on exactly the wrong side - fighting FOR civil rights is the right side. You are the enemy of innocent victims and American principles and justice - you are the side of evil.

African Americans generally don't like gay people. Surprised? Don't be, thanks to them coming out to vote for President Obama, prop 8 was passed. Racial minorities do not accept the argument of gay right activist piggy backing off of the rights they gained. Its apples and oranges.

I've commented at length on how the African American community who have this bigotry are wrong as well.

Name one right that same sex couples gain from this pursuit of tearing down prop 8? "Right to marry" Is just the right to use a word, because civil unions carry the same legal weight as any other marriage.

To repeat, not having 'the word' has no purpose but to create second-class status for gays. That's the reason to pass it.

However, there are hundreds of rights denied under civil union law, but they're not the issue since if all of them were addressed, you would still have the issue of discrimination.

The only solution is equality - overcoming the bigotry you are such a fighter for.

-Former California Citizen and LDS member.

You should be ashamed.

Current and always California Citizen

You are a great example of the way that religious fundamentalists/extremists given power are a danger to the rights of others - our counterpart to the Taliban.

Sure, the first step might 'just' be denying innocent people the right to get married - but a decade ago there were laws on the books for gay sex to get prison.

It's the same mentality, the degree just varies with 'what they can get away with'.

A couple decades ago, in CA there was a ballot initiative very similar politically to Prop 8, to ban gays from being teachers of children.

Go back further, and the stigma increased - there's a reason for high suicide rates. A step further and you have gays executed, as in Iran.

 

[sao123]

You are welcome to your utopian notion of how it should work. Until it works that way, which is a separate issue, discrimination is wrong. Marriage equality is needed until that happens.

So what if religious instituions have used the word? It has multiple meanings, both secular and various meanings within religions.

The secular meaning needs to not be discriminatory against gays. The religious meanings don't change.

If they did, which they don't, it's still a message to gays that they're second-class and not equal that they can't have 'the word'.

Yes, just as ending segregation was 'forcing acceptance' onto those whites who views blacks as undesirable to have near them, same with inter-racial marriage.

The bottom line is it's YOU who are WRONGING with discrimination innocent people, denying them rights for reasons you cannot back up except for 'they're you're opinions'.

Gays aren't forcing ANYTHING on you except the requirement that you can't wrongfully discriminate against THEM.

The arrogance and blindness of the bigots is amazing - you are the one denying others rights and you are the 'victim' here.

Congratulations on your generic argument against every civil rights issue, ever.

You're on exactly the wrong side - fighting FOR civil rights is the right side. You are the enemy of innocent victims and American principles and justice - you are the side of evil.

I've commented at length on how the African American community who have this bigotry are wrong as well.

To repeat, not having 'the word' has no purpose but to create second-class status for gays. That's the reason to pass it.

However, there are hundreds of rights denied under civil union law, but they're not the issue since if all of them were addressed, you would still have the issue of discrimination.

The only solution is equality - overcoming the bigotry you are such a fighter for.

You should be ashamed.

Current and always California Citizen

You are a great example of the way that religious fundamentalists/extremists given power are a danger to the rights of others - our counterpart to the Taliban.

Sure, the first step might 'just' be denying innocent people the right to get married - but a decade ago there were laws on the books for gay sex to get prison.

It's the same mentality, the degree just varies with 'what they can get away with'.

A couple decades ago, in CA there was a ballot initiative very similar politically to Prop 8, to ban gays from being teachers of children.

Go back further, and the stigma increased - there's a reason for high suicide rates. A step further and you have gays executed, as in Iran.

You also are welcome to your utopian notion of how it should work. All men are created equal, but they can choose to not be. People choose to be criminals. People choose to be gay. Its a preference. A choice. Denying gays rights are no different than denying a thief his freedom. No more discrimination than placing a murder in jail. Sodmization is still a crime in most states, homosexual behavior is nothing more than consenting sodomization. It is disgusting, immoral, and should still be jailworthy as well.

Getting people out to vote isn't evil. Lying is. Saying that legal gay marriage will cause our children to learn buttsex in school was and is a defamatory lie.

- wolf

Its hardly a lie... their fears are very rational.

the same people who want to legalize gay marriage, are the ones trying to remove abstainence education in favor of lets pass out condoms and birth control in school. You're either in intentional denial or a moron if you dont think for one minute that a homosexual agenda will be attempted to added to sex ed curriculum.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Snipped bigoted crap.

Wow. And I thought Spidey was the most bigoted poster here.

 

[Craig234]

You also are welcome to your utopian notion of how it should work.

Regardless of any utopian issue, discrimination is wrong in the meantime.

You can't dodge the issue of discrimination by saying' discrimination is ok until we change the whole system to the way I'd like it'.

All men are created equal, but they can choose to not be. People choose to be criminals. People choose to be gay. Its a preference. A choice. Denying gays rights are no different than denying a thief his freedom. No more discrimination than placing a murder in jail. Sodmization is still a crime in most states, homosexual behavior is nothing more than consenting sodomization. It is disgusting, immoral, and should still be jailworthy as well.

Well, any question that you would deny your mentality leads to the supporting of criminalizing homosexuality is ended.

First, gay marriages do not hurt people. While they're justified simply as rights for the people, they also even benefit society. They're not analogous to theft.

Second, you make it easy to identify a key error you make - your ignorance on homosexuality. If it were 'a choice', it could be argued, who does it hurt? But it's not.

Human sexuality is complex, but generally, heterosexuals don't choose to be heterosexuals - you don't see a lot of 4 year olds obsessed with sex or a lot of teens who aren't - and homosexuals don't choose to be homosexuals. If you had anything but information out of your orafices for your opinion, and actually looked at what gays say about when their orietnation became clear to them, as a rule it's from the moment they have any sexual feelings.

Because of society's huge bigotry against homosexuality, many gays fight it - but that's not because they don't have gay feelings.

Gays who desparately want not to be gay, who try any 'gay conversion therapy' they can find from those who want to change them for various reasons, have a near zero rate of doing so.

The few who say otherwise can easily be explained under the 'human sexuality is complicated' above - sexuality can be twisted with the right pressures.

You say it's 'disgusting' - that's your (and my, for that matter) problem. If you find blacks disgusting, you don't pass a law the can't eat near you - you eat somewhere else.

Immoral? That's you, not gays. How is it that a percentage of people being naturally gay is 'immoral'? You have no idea about the word 'moral' and how you are on the immoral side.

You are the one who, because of ignorant bigotry, want to deny people the rights they deserve. You are the monster hurting others, not gays.

Sodomy jailworthy? You say it still is. Where? As for whether it should be, you deserve jail first, but you and gays both have rights against such imprisonment.

What a monster, wanting to put people in jail for YOUR hate and bigotry.

the same people who want to legalize gay marriage, are the ones trying to remove abstainence education in favor of lets pass out condoms and birth control in school.

No one wants to remove 'abstinence education' from school. They want to remove ABSISTENCE ONLY education as the exclusive education - something that has been shown to cause much higher rates of teen pregnancy and STD's. The same areas with the strongest opposition to sex education, are the same ones with the worst teen pregnancy rates.

But you are just ranting now, throwing out any old ignorant opinion you have on anything about sex.

You're either in intentional denial or a moron if you dont think for one minute that a homosexual agenda will be attempted to added to sex ed curriculum.

Yes, the 'homosexual agenda' to tell the truth and treat people who are gay as equals, not as 'people who chose to be gay and deserve imprisonment'.

You are the poster child for the need for such education, you bigot.

 

[FuzzyBee]

You are just ASSuming that I tolerate lies when told by people I support.

There's a difference between "tolerating" "evil" (as you call it) and using it as the sole reason to be opposed to a strategy. (once again, *as you stated*)

Sorry you can't see the difference. Or, perhaps, you *can* see the difference, but you just don't have the courage to admit that you vote for "evil" (yet again, your words) candidates and positions simply because you agree with them.

Rationalize all you want - it won't get you anywhere.