If you aren't from California, you may not be following this:

If you aren't from California, you may not be following this:

Joined: April 17th, 2006, 10:37 pm

August 5th, 2010, 1:29 pm #1

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker overturned the voter-approved ban known as Proposition 8 Wednesday, declaring that limiting marriage to a man and a woman serves no legitimate purpose and is an "artifact" rooted in "unfounded stereotypes and prejudices."

"Rather than being different, same-sex and opposite-sex unions are, for all purposes relevant to California law, exactly the same," Walker wrote in an unequivocal and strongly worded 136-page ruling. "The evidence shows conclusively that moral and religious views form the only basis for a belief that same-sex couples are different from opposite-sex couples."


http://www.bostonherald.com/news/nation ... 0&srvc=rss

Proposition 8, which was pushed through by the LDS and Catholic churches to ban gay marriage -- the judge has declared the ban unconstitutional but has temporarily stayed his ruling until August 6, 2010, when there will be a hearing to determine whether a continuing stay would be put in place. There will be appeals, I'm sure. But I love what the judge had to say:

The ruling says:

Marriage in the United States has always been a civil matter. Civil authorities may permit religious leaders to solemnize marriages but not to determine who may enter or leave a civil marriage. Religious leaders may determine independently whether to recognize a civil marriage or divorce but that recognition or lack thereof has no effect on the relationship under state law.

Walker also writes,

Proposition 8 does not affect the First Amendment rights of those opposed to marriage for same-sex couples. Prior to Proposition 8, no religious group was required to recognize marriage for same-sex couples.

He cites the California constitution that...

[A]ffording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.

Walker examines about how several major religious groups -- Catholics, Mormons, conservative evangelicals such as the South Baptist Convention, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod -- condemn either homosexual identity or behavior or both, citing documents from the Vatican to denominational resolutions.

But he spells out in all capital letters in the decision:

A PRIVATE MORAL VIEW THAT SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE INFERIOR TO OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES IS NOT A PROPER BASIS FOR LEGISLATION...

California's obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to "mandate [its] own moral code."


http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -walker-/1







Quote
Like
Share

Striver
Striver

August 5th, 2010, 2:32 pm #2

Good for Judge Vaughn. When, in the Bible, was a ceremony made necessary for marriage? Was it the marriage at Canaan?
Quote
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

August 5th, 2010, 7:03 pm #3

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker overturned the voter-approved ban known as Proposition 8 Wednesday, declaring that limiting marriage to a man and a woman serves no legitimate purpose and is an "artifact" rooted in "unfounded stereotypes and prejudices."

"Rather than being different, same-sex and opposite-sex unions are, for all purposes relevant to California law, exactly the same," Walker wrote in an unequivocal and strongly worded 136-page ruling. "The evidence shows conclusively that moral and religious views form the only basis for a belief that same-sex couples are different from opposite-sex couples."


http://www.bostonherald.com/news/nation ... 0&srvc=rss

Proposition 8, which was pushed through by the LDS and Catholic churches to ban gay marriage -- the judge has declared the ban unconstitutional but has temporarily stayed his ruling until August 6, 2010, when there will be a hearing to determine whether a continuing stay would be put in place. There will be appeals, I'm sure. But I love what the judge had to say:

The ruling says:

Marriage in the United States has always been a civil matter. Civil authorities may permit religious leaders to solemnize marriages but not to determine who may enter or leave a civil marriage. Religious leaders may determine independently whether to recognize a civil marriage or divorce but that recognition or lack thereof has no effect on the relationship under state law.

Walker also writes,

Proposition 8 does not affect the First Amendment rights of those opposed to marriage for same-sex couples. Prior to Proposition 8, no religious group was required to recognize marriage for same-sex couples.

He cites the California constitution that...

[A]ffording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.

Walker examines about how several major religious groups -- Catholics, Mormons, conservative evangelicals such as the South Baptist Convention, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod -- condemn either homosexual identity or behavior or both, citing documents from the Vatican to denominational resolutions.

But he spells out in all capital letters in the decision:

A PRIVATE MORAL VIEW THAT SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE INFERIOR TO OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES IS NOT A PROPER BASIS FOR LEGISLATION...

California's obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to "mandate [its] own moral code."


http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -walker-/1






About time we started following the lead of more civilized nations and ended sanctioned bigotry.

-----------------------------------------------
"I am not absolutely positive there is no god. Only in the sense that I'm not absolutely positive there is no large china teapot in orbit in the solar system." -- Richard Dawkins
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

August 5th, 2010, 7:14 pm #4

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker overturned the voter-approved ban known as Proposition 8 Wednesday, declaring that limiting marriage to a man and a woman serves no legitimate purpose and is an "artifact" rooted in "unfounded stereotypes and prejudices."

"Rather than being different, same-sex and opposite-sex unions are, for all purposes relevant to California law, exactly the same," Walker wrote in an unequivocal and strongly worded 136-page ruling. "The evidence shows conclusively that moral and religious views form the only basis for a belief that same-sex couples are different from opposite-sex couples."


http://www.bostonherald.com/news/nation ... 0&srvc=rss

Proposition 8, which was pushed through by the LDS and Catholic churches to ban gay marriage -- the judge has declared the ban unconstitutional but has temporarily stayed his ruling until August 6, 2010, when there will be a hearing to determine whether a continuing stay would be put in place. There will be appeals, I'm sure. But I love what the judge had to say:

The ruling says:

Marriage in the United States has always been a civil matter. Civil authorities may permit religious leaders to solemnize marriages but not to determine who may enter or leave a civil marriage. Religious leaders may determine independently whether to recognize a civil marriage or divorce but that recognition or lack thereof has no effect on the relationship under state law.

Walker also writes,

Proposition 8 does not affect the First Amendment rights of those opposed to marriage for same-sex couples. Prior to Proposition 8, no religious group was required to recognize marriage for same-sex couples.

He cites the California constitution that...

[A]ffording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.

Walker examines about how several major religious groups -- Catholics, Mormons, conservative evangelicals such as the South Baptist Convention, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod -- condemn either homosexual identity or behavior or both, citing documents from the Vatican to denominational resolutions.

But he spells out in all capital letters in the decision:

A PRIVATE MORAL VIEW THAT SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE INFERIOR TO OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES IS NOT A PROPER BASIS FOR LEGISLATION...

California's obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to "mandate [its] own moral code."


http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -walker-/1






... the 20th century, at last, and are trying to catch up with countries far ahead of them.

Progress seems to be a slow process indeed.


<p align="left"> - abductive, inductive, deductive are
the 3 basic modes of reasoning and
when we fail to discern between them
we are destined to act accordingly ...


<p align="center">... after all, inference demands explicit contains implicit
so, iff what is explicitly posed is true, then what it
necessarily infers or implies must logically be true
as well - if not, then it is incontrovertibly axiomatic
there is something amiss with the explicitly posed ...


<p align="right">... the excruciating irony of incomprehensibility
& self-refutation thus; those oblivious of it become
indispensably the experts in applying it, effectually
revealing the exact opposite of apparent intent
thereby granting the courtesy of instant clarification.

Mice In A Maze-Going In Circles


<p align="left">It is as it is - It goes as it goes
If it doesn't go, that's how it goes
If it isn't, then that's how it is

<p align="right">_______________________
I like hu-mans. Really
They do funnee stuffs

They seems to live with the
impression that they is some
sorts of omniscient - you can
then always depend on them
to tells you exactly what your
thoughts and feelings is.

Handy
New!! Improved!! Now With T-Formula!!


There is forgiveness. Unfortunately, forgiveness doesn't mean a thing
..... when not applied that is. Therefore, it is I who forgive, publically
those who either dare or will not - for, as it seems, they are not ready
yet, to do so by themselves; out of themselves. I hereby thus, plow
the road; leading the way, for those eager to walk that walk as well.
JVH, July 20, 2010, 2:22

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

August 6th, 2010, 1:07 pm #5

first of all, when it is accepted that two beings who can not reproduce within the system that they live are accepted as the norm, it shows that the system has no INTEREST in continuuing its own "kind", its own species:

sure there are lots of warm wombs around for awhile, but sooner or later the "right" for the woman not to reproduce in every country and nation and culture, will bring this closed system to a halt:

why should women want to bring life into the world when men don't want to be there to succur it, nurture it? when men would rather be men and let some other lower life in their "eyes" have children for them?


it goes against the NORM of nature and even though I could care less about their sexual needs or choices, I can see the writing on the wall of what it means for the "endurance" of the species when neither the male or female choose children any longer:

they die out....

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the writing on that wall


now you may say, oh, there are so many many women who don't realize that they have a choice yet


it won't take thousands of years before they come to the conclusion that having familes in a world that doesn't value them is not the best choice to make:
every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

August 6th, 2010, 1:21 pm #6

those who understand the NEXT SYSTEM and want to bring it here to this world will endure, hence those who bring the KINGDOM OF HEAVEN to earth, those who agree with the WAY the whole thing works, these will multiply within the next system, while those who do not want to work accordingly will have no place to be born into:

if the old system comes to extinction because there are no donars (males) nor recipients for their sperm, then the system will come to a close:


but the other system will continue, hence the Mormons for instance will take over the world or the Catholics since they believe in the way the system works:


protestants however are producing less than those who work within the system; and athiests or homosexuals and those who have come to the "END" Of their ego are all in the same boat: they no longer see this system as having any value:


those who come to the end of the ego have a NEW SYSTEM however while those who want to stay within the system, but have no "womb" to enter into, these are outa luck:


the word for god in Greek is demon or "god of luck";


as long as someone is willing to birth these demons they will have a place to come back through:

once NO MAN GIVES TO THEM ANYMORE, they have one of two choices



return to the SOURCE and become ready to WORK IN THE SYSTEM the right way, becaome a servant to the system

or stay in the state of entropy.....till all the heat is gone because of a lack of desire to enter into another system


once a demon is delivered from the system by the "GOD OF ALL SYSTEMS", they are ready for a HIGHER CALLING than enduring system after system of entropy:


my HOPE is that I am never coming into this system again:

the way its going, is unbearable for me to think of living here IN THIS WORLD any longer


PSS and since all religious people will sooner or later come to the "END" of this system, (ego) they will move on as well.....


leaving only those who don't want to serve the system within it

good luck with that...



oh dear, another PS


as Catholics and Mormons continue to reproduce against Muslims who are sure to continue to reproduce if they don't suicide themselves out of here, it will be interesting to see who INHERITS the earth in the end:


it says the MEEK shall inherit it

whose going to be more meek?

Catholics?

Muslims?

Mormons?

these are the only ones who are populating the earth with a mission and if they don't come to the END of their ego before the mission is in FULL SWING, then the earth will become a better place....


of families and stuff like that.....


I can already imagine the voices of those who would rather die a thousand deaths than be part of that group lolol


Jews are an interesting group: they are working on actually populating the planet but they are 2% of the population:


they survived many many kinds of exiles of many nations due to their RELIGIOUS TORAH, but will that continue?

the orthodox are trying to make sure it does

will they win out over such variant groups as Catholics and Mormons?


and will these win out over Islam?


here is the good news

a soul that is not ready to move on from their ego can be born into another body as long as these Catholics, Mormons and Islam keep having babies


and when a Catholic, mormon and/or Muslim comes to the end of their EGO, they will UNDERSTAND the JEW

so, in the END, the JEW will rule because that is the FINAL outcome of religion; understanding what the JEW teaches


when the Messiah has come to all CHRISTIANS, they will come to grasp the LAW of Torah or the tree of life


so, they will not fight the Jew any longer and actually identify with them no matter what religion they are in.....as long as that religion brings them to the END of the ego....


then there is no more Jew and no more Greek, but a NEW CREATION


and this creation is outa here, out of this world and these live in a NEW EARTH and a NEW heaven


where righteousness dwells

a totally different system that is the RESULT of getting through and out of this one:


Last edited by Harpazo on August 6th, 2010, 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

August 6th, 2010, 3:17 pm #7

first of all, when it is accepted that two beings who can not reproduce within the system that they live are accepted as the norm, it shows that the system has no INTEREST in continuuing its own "kind", its own species:

sure there are lots of warm wombs around for awhile, but sooner or later the "right" for the woman not to reproduce in every country and nation and culture, will bring this closed system to a halt:

why should women want to bring life into the world when men don't want to be there to succur it, nurture it? when men would rather be men and let some other lower life in their "eyes" have children for them?


it goes against the NORM of nature and even though I could care less about their sexual needs or choices, I can see the writing on the wall of what it means for the "endurance" of the species when neither the male or female choose children any longer:

they die out....

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the writing on that wall


now you may say, oh, there are so many many women who don't realize that they have a choice yet


it won't take thousands of years before they come to the conclusion that having familes in a world that doesn't value them is not the best choice to make:
... if gays are allowed to get married, heterosexual couples will all of a sudden not want to have children anymore.

That sounds alot like the Christian claim that if gay marriages are legalized, everybody will want to become gay.

Not me.

-----------------------------------------------
"I am not absolutely positive there is no god. Only in the sense that I'm not absolutely positive there is no large china teapot in orbit in the solar system." -- Richard Dawkins
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

August 6th, 2010, 7:24 pm #8

I didn't infer that at all:

I said what I said and no inferences are required:


every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

August 6th, 2010, 8:08 pm #9

Yvonne said: it goes against the NORM of nature

Well, actually it doesn't. If homosexuality were unnatural, then there wouldn't be any homosexual animals.

What it goes against is your view of what is the norm of nature.

Yvonne said: I didn't infer that at all: (that legalizing gay marriage will make heterosexuals not want to have children)

Let's take a look at what you said:

Yvonne said: I can see the writing on the wall of what it means for the "endurance" of the species when neither the male or female choose children any longer:

Sure sounds like you are assuming that if gay marriage is legalized, heterosexual couples will no longer want to have children.

-----------------------------------------------
"I am not absolutely positive there is no god. Only in the sense that I'm not absolutely positive there is no large china teapot in orbit in the solar system." -- Richard Dawkins
Last edited by edstrange13 on August 6th, 2010, 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

lox
lox

August 6th, 2010, 8:10 pm #10

How many children can two males or females (homosexuals) produce like a hetero couple can?
Quote
Share