Assault on California's Constitution

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

I believe within the next 20 or 30 years, certainly within 50 years a Privacy Amendment will be proposed and added to our Bill of Rights, which limits government powers in matters of relationships, marriage and family. IMO this amendment is not only inevitable but is already long overdue.

A generally worded amendment would give courts the ammunition they've needed all along, to limit government intrusion into places where it should not be: reproductive rights for women, marriage rights for same-sex couples etc.
 
What truly amazes me is that there are so many people out there that actually still swallow this bullshit hook, line and sinker. This is the 21st century, yet I feel like I'm living in a time that if I should go to the doctor to treat an infection, he's gonna stick a few leeches to my forehead to cure me!! How can people live their lives with their heads buried so far up their asses, without benefit of an original thought?? I still say, and always will, that if straighties want to "protect" marriage, then make divorce illegal, and let's see how they do then.
 
I've Often Thought...

...That the way to get religion out of governmental policy is to have a go at making the restrictions of all major religions the law of the land. Hear me out.

We should outlaw all pork products as offensive to both Jews and Muslims. Alcohol is against Muslim beliefs, too, so ban that. Exposure of bare flesh is prohibited by so many religions and denominations that we should certainly require everyone to be covered from neck to toe, plus a hat. Newspapers and magazines and books should be kept from running pictures, which are the dread "graven images" so distasteful to religions. Television and motion pictures and Internet images would fall into this category as well, so let's get rid of those.

Shellfish and all beef which does not meet both kosher and halal requirements should also be banned. Businesses should not be allowed to operate on anyone's Sabbath, even though there is more than one day observed by the various major religions. Men should not be permitted to shave. No one could have a credit card, because of the Biblical prohibitions on usury. Lotteries and casinos would have to go too, of course.

No religion would be favored, but everyone would have to suspend all personal, political, business, and educational preferences in favor of observing all religions' restrictions.

I think about two weeks of this should be about enough to make people realise how crazy it is for any government to impose religious observances and restrictions on everybody.
 
Better define the length of those "weeks"!

Good idea - and really, isn't that the ultimate goal of PC? To take away everyone's rights and make everyone's life miserable as hell?
ducks and runs....
 
Rigid Right

One problem I see is the rigid right has lots and lots and lots of loud mouths spouting crap 24/7, anywhere and everywhere you turn. Where-o-where are any left of right voices? Where is the in your face centrist to talk over Pat Roberson? Where is a clear headed commentator to shut Grover Norquist up?

I'm a liberal leaning Independent. If 2 people want to marry - fine, it doesn't matter to me. Heck, if 3 people want to marry I'm fine with that to. It doesn't make my life better or worse, if it makes yours better I'm all for it. I'd hope you felt the same for me. Maybe that is is missing ingredient, or puzzle piece - being happy for someone else's happiness. Perhaps people are so miserable that they don't want anyone else to be happy.

At this point I just don't know what's wrong with people in this country. I'm ashamed of my fellow Americans
 
Matt,

It is largely our own fault. The christianists* are well organized, convinced that no matter how many people they torture, hate, murder or lives they destroy, their place in heaven is guaranteed.
In fact, as my dear brother has informed me - by making my life hell on earth, they are making it easier for me to be saved.

We, however, are not organized. In the 1980's and well into the 1990's, many gays were castigated and kicked out of our organizations for advocating gay marriage.
Let someone who is a vegetarian dare to wear leather or fur, he is roundly condemned and torn to shreds.
Let a person who is otherwise so far to the knee-jerk-left she makes Kucinich look like a fascist dare to say she supports the 2nd amendment and le Poof! the queens around here decry her as a fascist and roundly attack her to pieces.
Let a really good candidate like Clinton lose the nomination and see how many are going to "show us" by voting for McCain.
Yeah, they'll show us all right.
Then we have charming souls who run around taking notes and threatening to turn us into the FBI because we don't adhere to their concept of being true Americans...

How the hell can we ever hope to stand up to them when we can't even take the time to support each other, in fact focus our energies on attacking and tearing each other down?

For too many of us on the left, it's "my way, all the way, 100% of the way" or drop dead, bitch. The christianists* pull together because they have a clear goal: taking away our rights, having us declared a running sore in the tissue of society and then having us tortured and put to death for "our own good."

Our only hope is, this fall, to accept that politics is the art of living with the "only bad" as opposed to the "dangerously bad". Those who demand intellectual and politically correct purity are going to have to bend their necks to the working class poor, to the blacks, the Hispanics, the older, heterosexual white men. It is not going to be enough to tell women that they have to vote for Obama because McCain is worse, no - we are going to have to swallow our pride and actually listen to these women when they say she lost because of sexism. How would we know? Hell, even I can dress in butch drag...I've even been accused of being heterosexual at times...but no woman will ever be seen first as a doctor, a lawyer or a scientist...she is always a woman.
OK, end of the rant.
Our enemies have made their goal very very clear. Are we going to line up and let them do it to us? Do we still, after all that has happened in the last seven years really believe they will play by the rules? They cherry-pick their own bible, why should they let a little thing like the US Constitution stop them?
*christianist: Not a Christian, rather a person who abuses the Christian religion to achieve their goals of torture, murder and domination of gays, women, Jews and their current victim-of-the-decade.
 
Keven, your brother sounds like a real case. If mine had the gall to say anything like that to me I'd tell him to concern himself with his own life, then I'd inform him he was no longer welcome in mine. And I'd stick to the eviction indefinitely, or until he changed his attitude. Life's too short to put up with that kind of bullshit, especially from one's own family.
 
Yeah, Jeff -

From 1978 to 2005 I only saw him when my mom had cancer surgery and when I visited my parents in 2000.
Since 2005, I have been forced to coordinate care for our parents with him. He, and his family make life as impossible as they can.
I can't move back permanently to the US yet, there is no alternative to putting up with him which does not involve my parents paying the price.
It's tough to convince people just how important it is to vote against this amendment in California. At best, we only have a very thin majority. When I see the comments of people with philosphophical pretensions and those who don't want us to have marriage because they think the whole institution is flawed, I just want to cry. This isn't about us. It is a beachfront from which to take away civil rights from all the groups which don't fall into the blue-eyed, white-skinned, heterosexual, republican, christianist world view.
We desperately need to mend fences with the Hispanic and the black community and fast. They need to know that if they don't support us here, they're next on these people's list.
 
Not just U.S.A. either

For what it is worth folks, it is not just the U.S.A. where more and more control of people's lives seems to be the objective of various governments.
Here in my Australian State of New South Wales, legislation was just passed by the State Legislative Assembly at 2'0 clock in the morning changing the State Planning Act, giving virtually unlimited power to the Minister for Planning in regards to planning issues in the state.
The most frightening part of this proposed law change is that the Minister can actually forcibly confiscate your private property if it is deemed in the "State's Interest",for example ,you own a rural property or two and some large developer,(who are rather large money donors to the ruling Labor Party)wants your property and you refuse the developer can go and complain to the Minister, he then can forcibly take over your property and sell it dirt cheap to the developer or at a larger price and then keep the surplus funds as a profit for the Government, while you only get what the Government deems a proper price for it.
Also the relatively new Federal Labor Government floated an idea a few months ago about controlling and censoring the Internet, under the guise of protecting children form internet porn,I feel we all live in scary times and all may be in for a rough ride soon.
I find this quite unbelievable actually considering these proposals are coming from slightly Left of Centre governments,although I believe Labor's Right Wing is the dominant faction.
Cheers people.
Steve.
 
Keven - while most of what you say is accurate, one thing is for sure - the blacks and hispanics will NEVER be next on these people's lists. They are organized and they scream very loud, and when they don't like something, they scream even louder. In this world of political correctness, no one will stand up and say anything for fear of being labeled a racist, because, naturally, anything anyone says that these folks don't agree with, automatically makes on a racist.
 
Oh, yeah, Steve -

here in Germany our Dr. Schäuble is using every single opportunity to take us back to the past...with technological eavesdropping at a level to make the worst of the GDR look like a child's game.
And all in the interest of our security.
Yeah, right...
Sometimes people wake up enough to fight back, but it is hard to do - fear is a powerful motivator and you are always confronted with the: "if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't mind the government listening in" mentality.
Like the current scandals at our Telekom, Aldi, Lidl, etc. aren't evidence enough that whenever you give these politicians an inch they'll take a mile.
Währt den Anfangen...prevent the beginnings.
Gosh, Andrew, you've made your feelings about blacks and Hispanics very clear. Do you suppose you could set aside your anger towards them long enough to see why it is in our interest to work with them? No, I am not very hopeful that the black community will, as a whole, help us - there is a serious gap there between what their grandparents achieved and the reality they now live. But we have to try.
The Hispanic community must be sensitized to just how easily this will make them vulnerable, then they will tell their local priest that he's wrong about this one and jump on board.
 
Lots of letters appearing in the local paper on this subject. A great one today from someone who advised they have been "married" for 24 years and asked,

"Did God ordain our marriage? I doubt it. We are atheists. We were married by a judge. As long as marriage is a legal contract administered by the government, it must be available for any adult to enter into with any other adult. Separation of church and state requires this, as the court rightly decided. Individual churches have the right to deny the marriage service to their own members if they choose to do so, but our government may not so discriminate."

This is one of the better rebuttals to the christianist drivel I've been reading since the court rendered its decision.
 
Keven -

Your comment about my feelings towards blacks and hispanics is way the hell out of line and dead ass wrong.

Having many friends who are black and/or hispanic, but especially black, the concept of acceptance of homosexuality is foreign to them. Not because they're black, but for religious reasons, especially here in the south, where the majority of them are southern baptist. But then again, show me any Baptist clan that accepts us as anything other than subhuman. African Methodist (AME Church) is not much better, and departs from the mainstream Methodist church on many issues, not just this one. Hispanics and Mexicans (no, they are not the same thing) are generally more "old world" devout Catholic, where homosexuality is simply not accepted. And yes, Catholicism as practiced in different cultures does differ from what we might encounter in the states or in Europe.

Does this make me angry? You bet your ass it does. But not because of race or color, but because of religion and the twisted, warped, perverted teachings of their form of "Christianity". And I've known enough of both black and hispanic folks as friends, co-workers and acquaintances to know that their "faith based" prejudices are not going to change any time soon. As a people, blacks, hispanics, and mexicans stand together with their own regardless of the issue. And they do it well and they make their voices heard loud and clear. Maybe that's something this minority can learn from those minorities.

Simply being "tolerated", to me, is completely unacceptable. All this means is you have to be nice to me to my face. Being accepted is a whole different ball game. And that is the direction in which we should all be heading.
 
Read the arguments in California's case and one can easily see why the "defense of marriage" camp lost, and has lost in other cases from Massachusetts to Hawaii. They rely on the same three ridiculous and legally indefensible arguments over and over again:

1. Same-sex marriage is icky and we don't like it.

2. Same-sex marriage is icky and God doesn't like it.

3. The sky will fall if we recognize same-sex marriage.

As Chief Justice George (a Republican appointee) pointed out in California's decision, these are the exact same set of arguments that were used to justify laws against interracial marriages for 150+ years in the U.S.:

"The opinion, written by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, cited the court's 1948 decision that reversed the state's interracial marriages ban. It found that "equal respect and dignity" of marriage is a "basic civil right" that cannot be withheld from same-sex couples, that sexual orientation is a protected class like race and gender, and that any classification or discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is subject to strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the California State Constitution. Associate Justices Joyce L. Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar, and Carlos R. Moreno concurred." (see link)

That last part should be music to the ears of any gay person, and it's a literal knife in the heart of the "defense of marriage movement", at least in California. Once a given class of individual is declared to be protected, there is no justification (or precedent) for subsequent courts to claim it is not.

 
"Gosh, Andrew, you've made your feelings about blacks and Hispanics very clear. Do you suppose you could set aside your anger towards them long enough to see why it is in our interest to work with them? No, I am not very hopeful that the black community will, as a whole, help us - there is a serious gap there between what their grandparents achieved and the reality they now live. But we have to try.
The Hispanic community must be sensitized to just how easily this will make them vulnerable, then they will tell their local priest that he's wrong about this one and jump on board."

Keven, is it ever possible for you to comment on any single issue without putting down America and Americans, accusing us of thought crimes, and TEACHING us about the realities we bear witness to every day of our lives?

How do YOU know about what Andrew's feelings are, toward blacks and Hispanics? And, even if you THINK you know, who are you to demand he change them? You have no way of knowing how varying personal experiences, his own cultural identification, or (gasp!) his OWN, unique take on things may have been formed.

And you are totally (and almost constantly) out of line in demanding he, and all the other posters here who don't necessarily share your multi-culti, neo-Marxist point of view, adopt YOUR only way of believing any gay man or progressive may think!

Now, I understand your German references. I also happen to have ties to Germany, and understand contemporary German culture, for better or worse.

Your way of thinking is not necessarily normative there, either.

And the arrogant, puff-up-your-chest, morally outraged approach doesn't play well here, either.

I did that here as well when I was new. It doesn't help matters or get your point across. In fact, the militancy and stridency turns members off.

So, puh-leeze stop TEACHING us about your takes on cross-cultural exchange, your lofty ideals, your inherent progressivism and intellectual superiority, because you're becoming a bad caricature that neither America, Germany, or the rest of the planet can really afford right now!

You are completely out of touch with reality, you have little to no empathy or understanding for anything which is not within your self-contained little bubble, and it's getting to a point where you could not possibly be deriving anything worthwhile to contributing to these threads, the way you do.

Not everything in life is "Scharaffenland". If incremental progress is the best we can manage for now, in the face of more pressing concerns, we can either forsake that for the benefit of becoming "Tom Of Finland" cartoon characters that the nation will rightfully laugh off as nonsensical and not worthy of consideration, or we can work for "change" in a concrete, hands-on, responsible, EXPERIENCED manner and actually have something to show for it at the end of the day.

Rant over.

As always, I apologize in advance for any wounded or insulted feelings the above may have caused.
 
"Simply being "tolerated", to me, is completely unacceptable. All this means is you have to be nice to me to my face. Being accepted is a whole different ball game. And that is the direction in which we should all be heading."

There are things in life, that you cannot force people to accept.

You cannot legislate others to treat you in one way or another, or even to discriminate against you, for whatever reason they perceive.

The best you can hope for, is to establish legislation that reduces the worst of the abuses, and to prevent violence (and even that's a stretch).

But marriage equality will not make anti-gay people less anti-gay. In fact, it will probably inflame matters, and make things worse.

That doesn't mean one shouldn't strive for it. It simply means that approaches to it will vary, and we need to be realistic about what can be achieved, and what it all means in the final analysis.

You cannot legislate human nature.
 
Scott, you're right for the most part, but quite a few exceptions can be cited. Remember Gov. George Wallace, standing in the hallway of the University of Alabama, blocking entrance to two black students, and declaring in his inauguration speech that year, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forevah!"

The man wound up dying a champion of civil rights.

 
Well,

I am not a neo-marxist, or any other type of communist. Nor have I ever been. I doubt you even now what a neo-Marxist is. I didn't until you called me one and I looked the term up. So sorry, it ain't me. In the 1950's, I would have been an Eisenhower Republican. In the 1960's, I found much to admire in Goldwater, tho' his position on civil rights already displeased my childish mind.
I am a democrat and a firm believer in the strict interpretation of the US Constitution. A rather fascinating document, especially the Amendments pertaining to civil rights.

Enough. You are just looking for an excuse to dump your considerable venom. Today you want me to play your victim, and I won't play.

Andrew, really and truly, I mean no offense - but now is not the time to tell other minorities that we are far more enlightened than they and they can begin improving themselves by helping us...

Full disclosure: My childhood nurse was black, my husband was black, all but one of my students when I was student teaching in the Bronx was black. Many of my students here in Munich are black Americans.
Growing up in the Southwest, need I even mention that I have at least a working acquaintance with both Hispanic and Native American cultures? I have found nothing in these racial and ethnic groups to justify such sweeping generalizations. Yes, many blacks are against us. Unfortunately. Yup, many Hispanics cling to a religious interpretation which is pre- Vatican I never mind II. But if we confront them with such attitudes, need we wonder when many feel affronted. You are trying and failing to do exactly the same thing to me by implying that my "European-ness" disqualifies me to understand the signifigance of civil rights for all citizens.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top