Tidal Wave Building Against Mormon Church After Prop 8 Passes

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LS8

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2008
1,285
0
0
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
If a law is truly against a state/federal constitution, than it will get kicked back anyway. I don't worry too much about amdendments like "8", or something similar becoming actual law.

Uhh ask the folks in Washington DC about that. The city had been oppressing its citizen's civil rights for 35 years in the form of an illegal hand gun ban. Just this year the ban was overturned by SCOTUS. It can take a while....

Americans should be able to get married and live their lives. Gay or straight shouldn't have anything to do with it.

I hope the gay & straight folks in Cali will work hard to get this overturned.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: jpeyton
You reap what you sow. The Mormon church decided to preach hate, and pick a fight in a state where the deck is stacked against their divisive policies.

Prop 8, in all likelihood, will be overturned by any number of courts in CA. The simple fact is that a majority vote cannot take away constitutional rights from a minority through a ballot measure.

But they decided to make it a Mormon church initiative to get the measure passed (doesn't that violate their status as a non-profit?). Now Hollywood is going to hit them where it hurts; a protest of Sundance is one big step. I'd personally like to see Redford move the festival to another state in a symbolic move.

Text

Daniel Ginnes carried a banner declaring: "No More Mr Nice Gay." Brian Lindsey held up a sign billing Joseph Smith, founder of the Church of the Latter Day Saints, as a "prophet, polygamist, paedophile." Hundreds of others simply chanted: "Mormon scum."

More than 2,000 gay rights protesters marched on a Mormon temple in Los Angeles on Thursday, throwing the church and its followers on to the front line of the battle over California's decision to ban same-sex marriage.

Earlier this week, 52.5 per cent of voters in the supposedly liberal state decided to back Proposition 8, a ballot measure that adds 15 words to the constitution, saying that: "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognised in California."

The development marked a massive setback for gay rights and left 18,000 couples, who had married in the five months since California legalised same-sex weddings, in legal limbo.

In the large and traditionally laid-back gay community, it also left a sense of injustice. Proposition 8 passed with the assistance of a $70m (£44m) campaign largely funded by out-of-state donations from Mormons. "It's taken something like this to make us realise the need to be more aggressive and angry and active," said Mr Ginnes, a graphic designer from West Hollywood. "People didn't think they were going to lose the vote, so they didn't realise it was worth fighting for.

"Now we have lost a fundamental right. That's a shame, but it's certainly galvanised a community that was apathetic. What you are seeing today is the birth of a movement."

In the coming days, a string of protests are planned across California, as campaigners mount a robust PR war against the Utah-based church. Many will picket services tomorrow.

"We should have got nasty a long time ago," said Mr Lindsey, who is originally from a Mormon family. "I'm not going to be polite any more, I'm not going to step around my belief that this is a nasty church with disgusting views which managed to buy an election. I don't care if it's people's religion. I'm going to stand up and fight it."

Thursday's protest, which gridlocked traffic in Hollywood for the second consecutive day, was mostly disciplined, with police reporting two arrests. Seven people were detained at a demonstration on Wednesday.

For the Mormon Church, it threatens a PR nightmare. The gay rights lobby boasts scores of prominent celebrity supporters who have already pledged vociferous support to the campaign to overturn Proposition 8.

The country music singer Melissa Etheridge, a prominent lesbian, announced yesterday that she will refuse to pay income tax until she's "allowed the same rights" as other taxpayers. Instead, she pledged to donate money to legal challenges arguing that the way Proposition 8 was put to the voters was unconstitutional.

Behind the scenes, the mood is turning increasingly ugly. "If they're going to vote away my rights based on fear and ignorance and prejudice, I'm going to give them something to be fucking scared of," read a message posted on the online bulletin board Queerty.

The Mormon Church is in damage limitation mode. "No one on either side of the question should be vilified, harassed or subject to erroneous information," it said in a statement.

The Mormons A snapshot

*The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was founded by Joseph Smith Jr in New York state in 1830 and developed by Brigham Young who migrated with the new Mormons to Salt Lake Valley, Utah, in 1847.

*There are 12 million membersworldwide who believe their church is a restoration of the Church asconceived by Jesus and that other Christian churches have gone astray.

*It is said to be the fourth largest Christian denomination in the whole of the United States.

*Mormons oppose homosexuality, abortion, sex outside of marriage, alcohol, drugs, pornography, gambling, tobacco, tea and coffee.

*Mormons hold that we all have an eternal life stretching either side of our life on earth. They believe that humans can become like gods in the afterlife, although subordinate to God.

*The Church of the Latter Day Saints tolerated "plural marriage" before the American Civil War. The practice was discontinued more than a century ago, but several thousand renegade Mormons in the western states still practise polygamy and the issue is one of the main obstacles to the religion being accepted as a mainstream branch of Christianity.

Text

SALT LAKE CITY ? Utah's growing tourism industry and the star-studded Sundance Film Festival are being targeted for a boycott by bloggers, gay rights activists and others seeking to punish the Mormon church for its aggressive promotion of California's ban on gay marriage.

It could be a heavy price to pay. Tourism brings in $6 billion a year to Utah, with world-class skiing, the spectacular red rock country and the film festival founded by Robert Redford among the state's popular tourist draws.

"At a fundamental level, the Utah Mormons crossed the line on this one," said gay rights activist John Aravosis, an influential Washington, D.C-based blogger. "They just took marriage away from 20,000 couples and made their children bastards. You don't do that and get away with it."

Salt Lake City is the world headquarters for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which counts about 62 percent of Utah residents as members.

The church encouraged its members to work to pass California's Proposition 8 by volunteering their time and money for the campaign. Thousands of Mormons worked as grassroots volunteers and gave tens of millions of dollars to the campaign.

The ballot measure passed Tuesday. It amends the California Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual act, overriding a state Supreme Court ruling that briefly gave same-sex couples the right to wed.

The backlash against the church ? and by
Advertisement
extension Utah ? has been immediate. Protests erupted outside Mormon temples, Facebook groups formed telling people to boycott Utah and Web sites such as mormonsstoleourrights.com began popping up, calling for an end to the church's tax-exempt status.

Aravosis is the editor of the popular political blog, americablog.com, which has about 900,000 unique monthly visitors.

He's calling for skiers to choose any state but Utah and for Hollywood actors and directors to pull out of the Sundance Film Festival. Other bloggers and readers have responded to his call.

"There's a movement afoot and large donors are involved who are very interested in organizing a campaign, because I do not believe in frivolous boycotts," said Aravosis, who has helped organize boycotts against Dr. Laura's television show, Microsoft and Ford over gay rights issues. "The main focus is going to be going after the Utah brand. At this point, honestly, we're going to destroy the Utah brand. It is a hate state."

Messages left with a Sundance spokeswoman Thursday and Friday were not immediately returned.

Leigh von der Esch, managing director of the Utah Office of Tourism, said she's aware that there's been discussion of a boycott, but her office hadn't received any calls about it Thursday. State offices are closed Friday.

"We're respectful of both sides of the equation and realize it's an emotional issue, but we are here promoting what we think is the best state in the country," she said.

The irony in the attack on Utah's tourism industry is that it would likely do the most harm in Salt Lake City and Park City ? two of the state's most liberal cities and those with some of the smallest percentages of Mormons in the state.

"Even though Salt Lake City is the location of the headquarters of the LDS church, there are really good people here ... in Utah that are sympathetic to our cause," said Scott McCoy, an openly gay state senator from Salt Lake City. "Rather than a boycott, I would rather have every gay person in the country come to Utah and show the people of Utah what genuine wonderful people and families we have, and to help educate them that we deserve the exact same legal rights and protections they and their families are afforded under the law."

What kind of economic, religious or political impact, if any, a boycott might have is unclear. The Mormon church has members all over the world and no plans to change its stance on gay marriage. A message left with a church spokeswoman Friday was not immediately returned. It issued a statement following Tuesday's vote calling for civility in the wake of the results.

"Such an emotionally charged issue concerning the most personal and cherished aspects of life ? family, identity, intimacy and equality ? stirs fervent and deep feelings," the statement says in part.

"No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information."

Bob Malone, CEO and president of the Park City Chamber of Commerce and Visitors Bureau, said he worked in Colorado in the early 1990s when it was targeted for a boycott following a law that prohibited cities from enacting protective legislation for gays and lesbians.

"You know, it had some legs at the very beginning. But it's one of those things when you don't know when it starts and when it ends because you really can't measure it," he said.

Malone, who serves on the state tourism board, said it is unfair to try to punish certain industries or parts of the state over an issue it had nothing to do with.

"It's really not a Park City thing, and I don't see it as a state thing. That was more of a religious issue," he said. "To sweep people in who really have nothing to do with that issue and have no influence over religious issues ? it's sad that people kind of think that and say, 'We're going to bury you.' It's sad to hear people talk like that."
ahhh, the power of community organization. Funny how you just can't seem to accept people with opinions and views that are different than yours. I mean it isn't like issues of racism, where the differences are clearly black and white.

You are an anti-bigot bigot. Kind of like reverse racism.

You have learned your lessons well.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: jpeyton
You reap what you sow. The Mormon church decided to preach hate, and pick a fight in a state where the deck is stacked against their divisive policies.

Prop 8, in all likelihood, will be overturned by any number of courts in CA. The simple fact is that a majority vote cannot take away constitutional rights from a minority through a ballot measure.

But they decided to make it a Mormon church initiative to get the measure passed (doesn't that violate their status as a non-profit?). Now Hollywood is going to hit them where it hurts; a protest of Sundance is one big step. I'd personally like to see Redford move the festival to another state in a symbolic move.

Text

Daniel Ginnes carried a banner declaring: "No More Mr Nice Gay." Brian Lindsey held up a sign billing Joseph Smith, founder of the Church of the Latter Day Saints, as a "prophet, polygamist, paedophile." Hundreds of others simply chanted: "Mormon scum."

More than 2,000 gay rights protesters marched on a Mormon temple in Los Angeles on Thursday, throwing the church and its followers on to the front line of the battle over California's decision to ban same-sex marriage.

Earlier this week, 52.5 per cent of voters in the supposedly liberal state decided to back Proposition 8, a ballot measure that adds 15 words to the constitution, saying that: "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognised in California."

The development marked a massive setback for gay rights and left 18,000 couples, who had married in the five months since California legalised same-sex weddings, in legal limbo.

In the large and traditionally laid-back gay community, it also left a sense of injustice. Proposition 8 passed with the assistance of a $70m (£44m) campaign largely funded by out-of-state donations from Mormons. "It's taken something like this to make us realise the need to be more aggressive and angry and active," said Mr Ginnes, a graphic designer from West Hollywood. "People didn't think they were going to lose the vote, so they didn't realise it was worth fighting for.

"Now we have lost a fundamental right. That's a shame, but it's certainly galvanised a community that was apathetic. What you are seeing today is the birth of a movement."

In the coming days, a string of protests are planned across California, as campaigners mount a robust PR war against the Utah-based church. Many will picket services tomorrow.

"We should have got nasty a long time ago," said Mr Lindsey, who is originally from a Mormon family. "I'm not going to be polite any more, I'm not going to step around my belief that this is a nasty church with disgusting views which managed to buy an election. I don't care if it's people's religion. I'm going to stand up and fight it."

Thursday's protest, which gridlocked traffic in Hollywood for the second consecutive day, was mostly disciplined, with police reporting two arrests. Seven people were detained at a demonstration on Wednesday.

For the Mormon Church, it threatens a PR nightmare. The gay rights lobby boasts scores of prominent celebrity supporters who have already pledged vociferous support to the campaign to overturn Proposition 8.

The country music singer Melissa Etheridge, a prominent lesbian, announced yesterday that she will refuse to pay income tax until she's "allowed the same rights" as other taxpayers. Instead, she pledged to donate money to legal challenges arguing that the way Proposition 8 was put to the voters was unconstitutional.

Behind the scenes, the mood is turning increasingly ugly. "If they're going to vote away my rights based on fear and ignorance and prejudice, I'm going to give them something to be fucking scared of," read a message posted on the online bulletin board Queerty.

The Mormon Church is in damage limitation mode. "No one on either side of the question should be vilified, harassed or subject to erroneous information," it said in a statement.

The Mormons A snapshot

*The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was founded by Joseph Smith Jr in New York state in 1830 and developed by Brigham Young who migrated with the new Mormons to Salt Lake Valley, Utah, in 1847.

*There are 12 million membersworldwide who believe their church is a restoration of the Church asconceived by Jesus and that other Christian churches have gone astray.

*It is said to be the fourth largest Christian denomination in the whole of the United States.

*Mormons oppose homosexuality, abortion, sex outside of marriage, alcohol, drugs, pornography, gambling, tobacco, tea and coffee.

*Mormons hold that we all have an eternal life stretching either side of our life on earth. They believe that humans can become like gods in the afterlife, although subordinate to God.

*The Church of the Latter Day Saints tolerated "plural marriage" before the American Civil War. The practice was discontinued more than a century ago, but several thousand renegade Mormons in the western states still practise polygamy and the issue is one of the main obstacles to the religion being accepted as a mainstream branch of Christianity.

Text

SALT LAKE CITY ? Utah's growing tourism industry and the star-studded Sundance Film Festival are being targeted for a boycott by bloggers, gay rights activists and others seeking to punish the Mormon church for its aggressive promotion of California's ban on gay marriage.

It could be a heavy price to pay. Tourism brings in $6 billion a year to Utah, with world-class skiing, the spectacular red rock country and the film festival founded by Robert Redford among the state's popular tourist draws.

"At a fundamental level, the Utah Mormons crossed the line on this one," said gay rights activist John Aravosis, an influential Washington, D.C-based blogger. "They just took marriage away from 20,000 couples and made their children bastards. You don't do that and get away with it."

Salt Lake City is the world headquarters for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which counts about 62 percent of Utah residents as members.

The church encouraged its members to work to pass California's Proposition 8 by volunteering their time and money for the campaign. Thousands of Mormons worked as grassroots volunteers and gave tens of millions of dollars to the campaign.

The ballot measure passed Tuesday. It amends the California Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual act, overriding a state Supreme Court ruling that briefly gave same-sex couples the right to wed.

The backlash against the church ? and by
Advertisement
extension Utah ? has been immediate. Protests erupted outside Mormon temples, Facebook groups formed telling people to boycott Utah and Web sites such as mormonsstoleourrights.com began popping up, calling for an end to the church's tax-exempt status.

Aravosis is the editor of the popular political blog, americablog.com, which has about 900,000 unique monthly visitors.

He's calling for skiers to choose any state but Utah and for Hollywood actors and directors to pull out of the Sundance Film Festival. Other bloggers and readers have responded to his call.

"There's a movement afoot and large donors are involved who are very interested in organizing a campaign, because I do not believe in frivolous boycotts," said Aravosis, who has helped organize boycotts against Dr. Laura's television show, Microsoft and Ford over gay rights issues. "The main focus is going to be going after the Utah brand. At this point, honestly, we're going to destroy the Utah brand. It is a hate state."

Messages left with a Sundance spokeswoman Thursday and Friday were not immediately returned.

Leigh von der Esch, managing director of the Utah Office of Tourism, said she's aware that there's been discussion of a boycott, but her office hadn't received any calls about it Thursday. State offices are closed Friday.

"We're respectful of both sides of the equation and realize it's an emotional issue, but we are here promoting what we think is the best state in the country," she said.

The irony in the attack on Utah's tourism industry is that it would likely do the most harm in Salt Lake City and Park City ? two of the state's most liberal cities and those with some of the smallest percentages of Mormons in the state.

"Even though Salt Lake City is the location of the headquarters of the LDS church, there are really good people here ... in Utah that are sympathetic to our cause," said Scott McCoy, an openly gay state senator from Salt Lake City. "Rather than a boycott, I would rather have every gay person in the country come to Utah and show the people of Utah what genuine wonderful people and families we have, and to help educate them that we deserve the exact same legal rights and protections they and their families are afforded under the law."

What kind of economic, religious or political impact, if any, a boycott might have is unclear. The Mormon church has members all over the world and no plans to change its stance on gay marriage. A message left with a church spokeswoman Friday was not immediately returned. It issued a statement following Tuesday's vote calling for civility in the wake of the results.

"Such an emotionally charged issue concerning the most personal and cherished aspects of life ? family, identity, intimacy and equality ? stirs fervent and deep feelings," the statement says in part.

"No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information."

Bob Malone, CEO and president of the Park City Chamber of Commerce and Visitors Bureau, said he worked in Colorado in the early 1990s when it was targeted for a boycott following a law that prohibited cities from enacting protective legislation for gays and lesbians.

"You know, it had some legs at the very beginning. But it's one of those things when you don't know when it starts and when it ends because you really can't measure it," he said.

Malone, who serves on the state tourism board, said it is unfair to try to punish certain industries or parts of the state over an issue it had nothing to do with.

"It's really not a Park City thing, and I don't see it as a state thing. That was more of a religious issue," he said. "To sweep people in who really have nothing to do with that issue and have no influence over religious issues ? it's sad that people kind of think that and say, 'We're going to bury you.' It's sad to hear people talk like that."
ahhh, the power of community organization. Funny how you just can't seem to accept people with opinions and views that are different than yours. I mean it isn't like issues of racism, where the differences are clearly black and white.

You are an anti-bigot bigot. Kind of like reverse racism.

You have learned your lessons well.

Opinions don't have value simply because someone holds them, some viewpoints SHOULD be fought against. People certainly have a right to their opinion, but I have a right to disagree with them and fight to make sure their opinion isn't made into law, no? Your position here seems to be an oddly PC one for a conservative...that you need to let people think and do whatever they want, regardless of how it impacts others, otherwise you are a "bigot".
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
6,425
2,610
136
Originally posted by: ICRS
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: ICRS
Let us not forget how the City of Gay Rights, decided it was to lazy to vote. San Francisco had one of its lowest voter turnouts in a presidental election.

Link, preferably comparing SF turnout this election with other elections' turnout?

For 2008:
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm
Registered: 477,356
Voted: 277,455
Percent: 58.1%


For 2004:
http://vote2004.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm

Registered:486,822
Voted:361,822
Percent: 74.3%



For 2000:
http://vote2000.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm
Registered: 486,636
Voted: 324,031
Percent: 66.5%

Reviewing the link I show San Francisco at 63.8% as of November 8 at 2:58pm.

I think you might be doing a apples to Oranges comparison here because not all the ballots are counted yet. There is still a lot of mail in ballots, provisional ballots, and damaged ballots (ballets that have to read by hand) out there to be counted. There are over 2+ Million ballots left to be counted in California. It can take up to early December until all the ballots are fully counted. The totals from 2000 and 2004 show vote totals after all the ballots are counted.
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: jpeyton
You reap what you sow. The Mormon church decided to preach hate, and pick a fight in a state where the deck is stacked against their divisive policies.

Prop 8, in all likelihood, will be overturned by any number of courts in CA. The simple fact is that a majority vote cannot take away constitutional rights from a minority through a ballot measure.

But they decided to make it a Mormon church initiative to get the measure passed (doesn't that violate their status as a non-profit?). Now Hollywood is going to hit them where it hurts; a protest of Sundance is one big step. I'd personally like to see Redford move the festival to another state in a symbolic move.

Ahh yes, the legislative slapping down the will of the people....deja vu for us here in MA...
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: TallBill
Yeah, if it was worth protesting about, then it was probably worth getting people out to vote. They blew it. Now suck it up and wait till the next state vote to re-amend the state constitution.

This was intentional, so that it could be brought before the courts yet again and away from the will of the people....

Imagine had they actually gone out to vote and they still lost...which they most likely would have?

At least here they have some thin grounds for saying the true will of the people was not represented...weak but I am betting it will work.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: bozack
Originally posted by: TallBill
Yeah, if it was worth protesting about, then it was probably worth getting people out to vote. They blew it. Now suck it up and wait till the next state vote to re-amend the state constitution.

This was intentional, so that it could be brought before the courts yet again and away from the will of the people....

Imagine had they actually gone out to vote and they still lost...which they most likely would have?

At least here they have some thin grounds for saying the true will of the people was not represented...weak but I am betting it will work.

"The will of the people", at least in my mind, implies a margin far greater than the slim majority with which prop 8 passed. The way people use that phrase implies that it's a vast majority that supports an idea, with only a few radical opposing it...not 48% of the population.

Of course it's all a moot point. Trends indicate that "the will of the people" will have shifted to the other side before the next election. No wonder there was such a push to pass this now, otherwise the will of the people would have said something completely different. But voting AGAINST a gay marriage ban is easier than voting to overturn one, which was clearly the point of all this. A prop 8 in 2010 might not have passed, but overturning it might not be so easy...clever strategy from the anti-gay rights folks...but who's subverting the will of the people now?
 

ICRS

Banned
Apr 20, 2008
1,328
0
0
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: ICRS
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: ICRS
Let us not forget how the City of Gay Rights, decided it was to lazy to vote. San Francisco had one of its lowest voter turnouts in a presidental election.

Link, preferably comparing SF turnout this election with other elections' turnout?

For 2008:
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm
Registered: 477,356
Voted: 277,455
Percent: 58.1%


For 2004:
http://vote2004.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm

Registered:486,822
Voted:361,822
Percent: 74.3%



For 2000:
http://vote2000.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm
Registered: 486,636
Voted: 324,031
Percent: 66.5%

Reviewing the link I show San Francisco at 63.8% as of November 8 at 2:58pm.

I think you might be doing a apples to Oranges comparison here because not all the ballots are counted yet. There is still a lot of mail in ballots, provisional ballots, and damaged ballots (ballets that have to read by hand) out there to be counted. There are over 2+ Million ballots left to be counted in California. It can take up to early December until all the ballots are fully counted. The totals from 2000 and 2004 show vote totals after all the ballots are counted.

Saddly no, because When I posted by link S.F only had 38,000 unprocessed ballots. Meaning voter turnout is still the lowest of the past 3 presidental election. The new number you posted likely includes nearly all of the uncounted votes most of which were provisional ballots.
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
6,425
2,610
136
Originally posted by: ICRS
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: ICRS
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: ICRS
Let us not forget how the City of Gay Rights, decided it was to lazy to vote. San Francisco had one of its lowest voter turnouts in a presidental election.

Link, preferably comparing SF turnout this election with other elections' turnout?

For 2008:
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm
Registered: 477,356
Voted: 277,455
Percent: 58.1%


For 2004:
http://vote2004.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm

Registered:486,822
Voted:361,822
Percent: 74.3%



For 2000:
http://vote2000.sos.ca.gov/Returns/status.htm
Registered: 486,636
Voted: 324,031
Percent: 66.5%

Reviewing the link I show San Francisco at 63.8% as of November 8 at 2:58pm.

I think you might be doing a apples to Oranges comparison here because not all the ballots are counted yet. There is still a lot of mail in ballots, provisional ballots, and damaged ballots (ballets that have to read by hand) out there to be counted. There are over 2+ Million ballots left to be counted in California. It can take up to early December until all the ballots are fully counted. The totals from 2000 and 2004 show vote totals after all the ballots are counted.

Saddly no, because When I posted by link S.F only had 38,000 unprocessed ballots. Meaning voter turnout is still the lowest of the past 3 presidental election. The new number you posted likely includes nearly all of the uncounted votes most of which were provisional ballots.

Understood. However you should wait until vote counting is completed before making statements and comparisons. The first number you posted of 58.1% was obviously inaccurate to use as a comparison.
 

dlx22

Golden Member
Apr 19, 2006
1,285
0
0
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: bozack
Originally posted by: TallBill
Yeah, if it was worth protesting about, then it was probably worth getting people out to vote. They blew it. Now suck it up and wait till the next state vote to re-amend the state constitution.

This was intentional, so that it could be brought before the courts yet again and away from the will of the people....

Imagine had they actually gone out to vote and they still lost...which they most likely would have?

At least here they have some thin grounds for saying the true will of the people was not represented...weak but I am betting it will work.

"The will of the people", at least in my mind, implies a margin far greater than the slim majority with which prop 8 passed. The way people use that phrase implies that it's a vast majority that supports an idea, with only a few radical opposing it...not 48% of the population.

Of course it's all a moot point. Trends indicate that "the will of the people" will have shifted to the other side before the next election. No wonder there was such a push to pass this now, otherwise the will of the people would have said something completely different. But voting AGAINST a gay marriage ban is easier than voting to overturn one, which was clearly the point of all this. A prop 8 in 2010 might not have passed, but overturning it might not be so easy...clever strategy from the anti-gay rights folks...but who's subverting the will of the people now?

I agree you definately cannot take the "will of the people" at face value. As much as we may blame the mormons for spreading the hate what can we say about the ~40% of the eligible voters in our country that didn't even bother to vote?

that being said i don't think its the court's place to overturn prop8. It is the court's job to interpret the law and not make the law. Part of the reason we have a seperation of powers is prevent the tyranny of the majority/minority. Say if roles were reversed and prop8 failed would we would want a conservative court to overturn the will of the people? I think not...
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136
LMAO at Hollywood and CA bitching about outside groups/states getting involved in their politics and affairs. This has been CA's modus operandi for decades, for both good and bad. I guess they reap what they sow...

Hollywood sticks itself in everyone else's politics all the time and CA has enough economic influence to be a rogue Pacific Washington. EG. regulating CO2 emissions. EG#2. Amendment 2 in CO in the early 90's.

Guess what CA liberals, its was your own Democratic voters that shot gay marriage down! You like when latinos and blacks vote for your preferred candidates, but when they don't follow liberal white cultural customs you are ready to go to war? And blame the Mormons no less... you are all a bunch of assholes.

So everyone hates the mormons now? No shit, its so different than the last 150 years. How do you think Mormons landed in that lifeless barren wasteland in the first place? When your closest neighbors are nuclear weapon test sites and Indian reservations you know you are on the shit end of the real estate stick. Fight hate w/ hate. Lovely.
They got thru a hellofva lot worse than that. Boycott Sundance..oohhhhh.... What next, write nasty letters saying how upset you are? Useless.


The truth is Gay Marriage proponents have been waging a stupid and incompetent campaign that has lost them ground in nearly every battle minus a few token victories. They are worse off than when they started. At least in 2000 things were neutral. Now by 2008 they managed to get constitutional bans in nearly a majority of states, including the gay capitol of America, California. Dumb, dumb, dumb motherfuckers. Makes GWB look like a master tactician. Which we can probably thank pro-gay marriage people for his re-election in 2004...:thumbsup: Oh well, at least it got us Obama.

==> Stop trying to force it thru the courts! You didn't like the democratic process's outcome so now you are going back to the courts to get the minority view restored? That will go over really well for Dems everywhere else in the US. Prepare for more losses.

How did blacks get civil rights awarded? They first got the popular will of the people behind them until they were an unstoppable force. They fought hard and sacrificed much to earn it. GM does not have it yet, and they've done nothing to earn it except try to sue and use legal conniving to enforce it. Lazy and cowardly. FU for even daring comparing yourselves to the same movement. Who are GM's leaders? What have they sacrificed and lost? Who is their MLK and where is his grave? Don't ride his coattails when you should be out making your own

I could careless about gay marriage, fine w/ me, but the people pushing it are its own worst enemies. Lazy self-important, self-righteous dipshits.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,070
55,595
136
In 2000 things were not neutral. If you take even a cursory look at public opinion polling you will see support for same sex marriage increasing at an extremely rapid rate.
 

Butterbean

Banned
Oct 12, 2006
918
1
0
Originally posted by: Bitek
LMAO at Hollywood and CA bitching about outside groups/states getting involved in their politics and affairs. This has been CA's modus operandi for decades, for both good and bad. I guess they reap what they sow...

Hollywood sticks itself in everyone else's politics all the time and CA has enough economic influence to be a rogue Pacific Washington. EG. regulating CO2 emissions. EG#2. Amendment 2 in CO in the early 90's.

Guess what CA liberals, its was your own Democratic voters that shot gay marriage down! You like when latinos and blacks vote for your preferred candidates, but when they don't follow liberal white cultural customs you are ready to go to war? And blame the Mormons no less... you are all a bunch of assholes.

So everyone hates the mormons now? No shit, its so different than the last 150 years. How do you think Mormons landed in that lifeless barren wasteland in the first place? When your closest neighbors are nuclear weapon test sites and Indian reservations you know you are on the shit end of the real estate stick. Fight hate w/ hate. Lovely.
They got thru a hellofva lot worse than that. Boycott Sundance..oohhhhh.... What next, write nasty letters saying how upset you are? Useless.


The truth is Gay Marriage proponents have been waging a stupid and incompetent campaign that has lost them ground in nearly every battle minus a few token victories. They are worse off than when they started. At least in 2000 things were neutral. Now by 2008 they managed to get constitutional bans in nearly a majority of states, including the gay capitol of America, California. Dumb, dumb, dumb motherfuckers. Makes GWB look like a master tactician. Which we can probably thank pro-gay marriage people for his re-election in 2004...:thumbsup: Oh well, at least it got us Obama.

==> Stop trying to force it thru the courts! You didn't like the democratic process's outcome so now you are going back to the courts to get the minority view restored? That will go over really well for Dems everywhere else in the US. Prepare for more losses.

How did blacks get civil rights awarded? They first got the popular will of the people behind them until they were an unstoppable force. They fought hard and sacrificed much to earn it. GM does not have it yet, and they've done nothing to earn it except try to sue and use legal conniving to enforce it. Lazy and cowardly. FU for even daring comparing yourselves to the same movement. Who are GM's leaders? What have they sacrificed and lost? Who is their MLK and where is his grave? Don't ride his coattails when you should be out making your own

I could careless about gay marriage, fine w/ me, but the people pushing it are its own worst enemies. Lazy self-important, self-righteous dipshits.




Tim Gill and the Soros groups have been using a stealthy national network to go after gay issues foes for a long time now. They are the last one to cry about money coming from out of state. They are manaics.

"The software mogul Tim Gill has a mission: Stop the Rick Santorums of tomorrow before they get started. How a network of gay political donors is stealthily fighting sexual discrimination and reshaping American politics"

They Won?t Know What Hit Them
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200703/tim-gill

People should stop comparing blacks and homosexuals too because it obviously pisses them off
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Ozoned
ahhh, the power of community organization. Funny how you just can't seem to accept people with opinions and views that are different than yours. I mean it isn't like issues of racism, where the differences are clearly black and white.

You are an anti-bigot bigot. Kind of like reverse racism.

You have learned your lessons well.

Opinions don't have value simply because someone holds them, some viewpoints SHOULD be fought against. People certainly have a right to their opinion, but I have a right to disagree with them and fight to make sure their opinion isn't made into law, no? Your position here seems to be an oddly PC one for a conservative...that you need to let people think and do whatever they want, regardless of how it impacts others, otherwise you are a "bigot".[/quote]



There are legal ramifications, both positive and negative, in being married. The bigot label thrown at people that oppose gay marriage fails, big time, within that context.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Ozoned
ahhh, the power of community organization. Funny how you just can't seem to accept people with opinions and views that are different than yours. I mean it isn't like issues of racism, where the differences are clearly black and white.

You are an anti-bigot bigot. Kind of like reverse racism.

You have learned your lessons well.

Opinions don't have value simply because someone holds them, some viewpoints SHOULD be fought against. People certainly have a right to their opinion, but I have a right to disagree with them and fight to make sure their opinion isn't made into law, no? Your position here seems to be an oddly PC one for a conservative...that you need to let people think and do whatever they want, regardless of how it impacts others, otherwise you are a "bigot".



There are legal ramifications, both positive and negative, in being married. The bigot label thrown at people that oppose gay marriage fails, big time, within that context.

That would seem to contradict the fact that many folks who are anti-gay marriage are in favor of equal legal rights for gay couples within the idea of "civil unions". In fact, prop 8 in CA was defended in just such a context. In fact, I don't think I've EVER heard gay marriage being opposed in terms of "legal ramifications". Arguments against it ALWAYS take a "tradition" or "family values" based position.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,070
55,595
136
Originally posted by: Ozoned


There are legal ramifications, both positive and negative, in being married. The bigot label thrown at people that oppose gay marriage fails, big time, within that context.

Please explain the ramifications of a gay couple being married as they affect you.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
Purely a civil rights issue. Purely!
I'm glad they are marching and fighting.
That?s the only way to do it.
No one or government is going to just grant
Rights, while the minority in question sits back and waits.
They need to continue this protest day after day no matter how long
it takes.

I think there should be another prop to address rights
of blacks, Hispanics and women. The only difference,
only gays get to vote and decide. Might as well let them know what its
like to be decimated against.

This bigotry against gays is beyond insanity.
If gays want civil rights, they should have them granted.
No questions asked. No strings attached.
Simple, done, resolved.
And tomorrow... nothing would be any different for the rest of America.
I can not believe in modern day, the stupid of society have such power over others.
Totally totally insane?!!!
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
PS. There are a lot of Gay owned businesses in Calif.
Owners should place a sign in the window of their business.
"If you voted for prop 8, DO NOT ENTER"
"Your business is not welcome here!!!"
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I hope this anti gay bullshit will someday end with the Supreme Court coming up with a Roe v Wade type decision that validates same sex marriages.

As a biological male married to a biological female, it may be pleasant to be in a powerful majority, but there is much to be said about the powerful legal rights bestowed by marriage, there is much to be said about the social stability marriage promotes, so bottom line, marriage is to be advocated for all willing to make the commitment.

Quite frankly I am baffled by anyone saying gay marriage would threaten my marriage in any way, and can only conclude those who oppose gay marriage are creepy puritans going way out of their way to make other people's lives as miserable as possible. I have no use for such misguided sadists, I do not believe they fit any religion I would want to believe in, and if they cannot represent any religious ideals, they can go to the devil as far as I am concerned.

My right are never advanced by denying others the same rights I have.

Lemon, I hate to throw a fly into the ointment or whatever it is... hehehe but the SCOTUS has decided this 'type' case by not deciding a Minnesota case by stating "there is no compelling Federal issue" meaning that case controls... Baker v Nelson is the case.
Having said that, the way this will have to pan out in Federal Court is for a case to be brought against DoMA joined by say Mass. arguing that 'The Full Faith and Credit Clause' of the US Constitution Demands all States recognize Mass law regarding Gay Marriage.. Then if the Court decides narrow like Ca and the rest will still be able to forbid Gay Marriage But, they could broaden the scope to say... Marriage is a fundamental right of all citizens and who they marry is protected by the various amendments etc...
Only way I see it happening...

 

dlx22

Golden Member
Apr 19, 2006
1,285
0
0
Originally posted by: between
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
The humor in the Mormon church getting it's panties all wadded up over gay marriage is that the equal protection clause in the constitution, if used to allow gay marriage (I'm in favor of gay marriage BTW) carried to it's logical progression, will allow polygamous marriage too (and I'm in favor of that also).

I don't think the equal protection clause could be used to argue for polygamous marriage. Equal protection doesn't mean everyone gets everything they want. It just means that if one group of people get a thing from the government, then other people are entitled to get that same thing, too.

Sorry but your statements contradict each other. Unless you don't believe polygamist are a group of people. lol. by your logic a man with two wives is entitled to the same government benifits as a man with a husband. Afterall they are both "groups of people" why discriminate between them?

I think what the poster you quoted was trying to indicate that if the definition of marriage is changed from man and woman to consenting adults then other relationships between consenting adults like polygamy may also some day be given equal protection under the law.

edited for clarity-few to many beers...lol
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
As for me, I somewhat thought it unfair when the religious right did not reach out to embrace the Mormon faith of Romney. But when the entire Mormon church threw their weight behind passing prop 8 in California,
my general attitude regarding Mormons goes from about average to the lowest of the low. And becomes a religious group that will get no support from me failing a long period on probation with the demonstrated reforms requited to re earn a change in my now decidedly negative attitude.

You Mormans should be ashamed of your selves.
 

dlx22

Golden Member
Apr 19, 2006
1,285
0
0
Originally posted by: between
Originally posted by: dlx22
Originally posted by: between
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
The humor in the Mormon church getting it's panties all wadded up over gay marriage is that the equal protection clause in the constitution, if used to allow gay marriage (I'm in favor of gay marriage BTW) carried to it's logical progression, will allow polygamous marriage too (and I'm in favor of that also).

I don't think the equal protection clause could be used to argue for polygamous marriage. Equal protection doesn't mean everyone gets everything they want. It just means that if one group of people get a thing from the government, then other people are entitled to get that same thing, too.

Sorry but your statements contradict each other. Unless you don't believe polygamist are a group of people. lol. by your logic a man with two wives is entitled to the same government benifits as a man with a husband. Afterall they are both "groups of people" why discriminate between them?

the limits on the number of people you can marry apply to everyone. everyone has the right to marry a single person. therefore equal protection isn't violated. if there was a rule saying men can marry more than one woman, but individual women can only marry one man each - then that would run afoul of equal protection.

I don't have a problem with polygamy, btw - I am just pointing out that equal protection isn't a winning argument for legalisation of polygamous marriage

Well under the present law everyone gets the same benifits if they marry someone of the opposite sex. (one could argue that this is equal protection under the law) but it makes no sense for someone who is gay to marry to someone of the opposite sex. If they did so they would receive the same benifits regardless if they were gay or not....but they probably wouldn't be very happy