On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, California lawmakers became the first in the United States to approve a bill recognizing same-sex marriages. Assembly Bill (AB) 849, "The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act," authored by California Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) passed 41-35. The California Senate approved it 21-15 last week. The bill, which makes the law defining marriage gender-neutral (gender was not placed into California’s marriage laws until 1977), does not require any church or other religious organization to recognize or perform same-sex marriages.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Bob A. Booey
Penis, apparently.
That is all.
77 - billy
"shove down your throat"
very interesting. A. Grande wants to tell gay people. change. become straight, then you will have all the rights i have.
and then he accuses them of shoving something down his throat? how logical is that?
the gays just want to be left alone to raise families and have the same rights as everyone else.
78 - Silas Kain
Because while there's sufficient evidence, Anthony, that you should not reproduce, you have the right to do so. People of the same sex should have the right to marry. If people such as yourself are too hung up on the very thought of it then let's compromise. I suggest something called a pactum domesticus which essentially is a domestic partnership but with tighter controls. The PD should be available to any TWO individuals, regardless of gender. Those couples, gay or straight, can enter into a PD which is governed by rules and laws which are devoted to making the relationship a success. Then the breeders can marry and divorce all they want. The ones with the real morals, real values and real love can enter into the PD with all the rights thereto afforded straight married couplings.
That little part should be case closed, but you libs are trying to shove down our throats.
Trust me, dude, I wouldn't shove anything down your throat. It would give you yet one more thing to whine about.
79 - Anthony Grande
"that vote was a decade ago,"
Try 4 years ago!!!!!!!
[Edited]
80 - Bob A. Booey
Yeah, and his throat too, you sonsabitches!
That is all.
81 - Silas Kain
What state are you in Anthony? I really want to look up the statistics.
82 - Anthony Grande
No, no more arguement we voted against which shouldn't give you the right to force it on us.
But this doesn't matter anyway because I know that two faced fascist we have for a governor is good for something and that is his veto power.
83 - Margaret Romao Toigo
FACT CHECK: Proposition 22, whose constitutionality is currently in question in the courts, passed 61.4% to 38.6% in the year 2000.
Just FYI.
84 - practical joe
Margaret: [Edited] What I said was -- If the majority doesn't rule -- who does? And you answered it with "Ultimately, the Constitution rules here."
Is that your way of admitting that the minority does not rule? Keep in mind that a MAJORITY was needed to approve the Constitution. It certainly was not a minority. Sure there are checks and balances -- but in the end... THE MAJORITY, NOT THE minority RULES. That's why we have that thing called a VOTE (look it up).
Now if your answer was simply an attempt to insinuate that the majority can be overruled by the Courts, keep in mind that the Constitutional way to change what the majority has decreed is via:
Article. V. The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments..
And don't overlook: Article [X.] of the Bill of Rights
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
IT"S POWER TO THE PEOPLE! -- i.e., the MAJORITY!
85 - Anthony Grande
Silas, are you serious???? Why do you think I am so mad???
I LIVE IN COLTON, CALIFORNIA!!!!!!!!!!
86 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Your fear of having same-sex marriage forced upon you us unfounded, Mr. Grande. When same-sex marriages are recognized, they will be optional, not required.
87 - Anthony Grande
"What I said was -- If the majority doesn't rule -- who does?"
The Fascist liberal congressmen of California.
88 - Anthony Grande
Margaret, THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!!!!!!!
89 - Silas Kain
You should embrace the idea of legal gay marriage, Anothony. It would be so good for your state's economy. After all we have more fags in CA than anywhere else. Did you know that us queers plan on taking CA over and making San Francisco the capitol? You'll have to move to Utah, Anthony! Well, I think you'd be happier there anyway.
90 - Anthony Grande
Silas, THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!!!!!!
YOU CANNOT MARRY STEVE!!!!!
California has the most gays because it has the highest population. We also have the most Mexicans and Asians and I wouldn't be surprised if we had the most Blacks and Whites.
THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!!!!
91 - Steve S
[Edited] It's my state too. And I've put more in taxes back in it, than your paper route ever has.
92 - Margaret Romao Toigo
I did not state an opinion, practical joe, I gave a rudimentary description of our system of government.
Those facts are not a matter of opinion open to debate simply because they make the position opposing the civil recognition of same-sex marriage untenable.
93 - practical joe
Hey Margaret,
How ‘bout all us guys which was born wanting to be polygamists?
It’s in our genes, we can’t help it.
Can you take up our cause with the Courts?
We is ‘bein discriminated against!
94 - Silas Kain
Anthony, sometimes what the majority decides is not always right. That's why we have a Constitution because mob rule is anarchy. Just because it passed doesn't mean it's right or moral. Face it, Anthony, if the referendum went the other way, you'd be using my argument. It's not the majority you are concerned about. You have your opinion and I have mine. We'll just agree to disagree on that issue. Don't allow yourself to be consumed by visions of men sleeping with each other. The preoccupation is getting in the way of other social problems that require more attention from astute people as yourself.
95 - Silas Kain
How ‘bout all us guys which was born wanting to be polygamists?
The Bible promotes polygamy and misogyny. Therefore it must be righteous. Great Caesar's ghost! Can we go back to the good old days of Zeus and Olympus?
96 - practical joe
Polygamy is in our genes!
We can't help it!
97 - Steve S
If you want biblical marriage then you want marriage where women are as property and men can marry as many as they can provide for.
98 - practical joe
"If you want biblical marriage then you want marriage where women are as property and men can marry as many as they can provide for."
Who wants that?
My religion teaches one man -- one woman.
99 - Silas Kain
That's it, Steve S. The righteous want to reduce womankind to property. They have a secret agenda. By creating the anti-queer smokescreen they are getting their own agenda through. Perhaps all these straight guys are jealous because we get the toaster ovens for our 'conversions' and they don't.
100 - Anthony the real Californian
[Entire comment deleted]
101 - Anthony the real Californian ....Grande
"The righteous want to reduce womankind to property. They have a secret agenda."
The funny thing is that you will never ever say that again when we elect Condy as our next president.
My mom is Anti-Gay Marriage because she is a methodist. Do you think she wants to reduce womankind to property???
102 - Silas Kain
That's it, Anthony! Condy for President! OMG, that's precious. Dude, if you only knew what you were saying. There is poetic justice. There is a God and He has a sense of humor! He created you!
103 - Steve S
My religion teaches one man -- one woman.
Recognition from my government should not be contingent on your religion.
104 - Silas Kain
Steve S, take heart. Anthony wants Condy for President! Review his writings. Think about his perspective. Condoleeza for President is so ironic on so many levels!
105 - practical joe
Steve S:
My religion teaches one man -- one woman.
Recognition from my government should not be contingent on your religion.
---
And I say -- your religion says two men or two women.
And recognition from my government should not be contingent on your religion.
106 - Anthony Grande
When did I say I want Condy for President??? I haven't decided who If I will vote for her or not. It all depends what her beliefs on abortion and gay marriage is. She claimed she was "mildly pro choice" but I believe we will hear otherwise, but if that is not the case in the primaries I am voting for Frist or someone else who is extremely anit-abortion and anti-gay marriage.
The problem with Condy is that she is devoted to her job and doesn't speak much to the public about her issues so much about her views are debated on.
She would make a great Commander and Cheif. Much better than Hillary!!!!
107 - RogerMDillion
"Do you think the Recall was mob rule???"
Yes it was, genius. The people had voted and Gray won again because the Repubs put up an even worse candidate in Simon, a grown-up version of you. Things weren't well a few months after the inaugration and the mob screamed and whoned "Do Over", so we had to waste the time and money with the special election. They got Arnold and now they are surprised that he sucks at the job.
108 - Margaret Romao Toigo
The old polygamy ploy? You mean you don't wish to marry your dog or cat instead? C'mon, you're going to have to do much better than that.
Here, let me help you.
When you engage in a debate, you must present pragmatic arguments and avoid the use of emotional appeals and logical fallacies such as straw men, slippery slopes, red herrings, etc.
If you want to make an effective and convincing case against the civil recognition of same-sex marriages, you must place your opponents on the defensive and you must do so decisively.
Here are a few surefire methods for doing just that:
You could, for example, demonstrate how the civil recognition of same-sex marriage is a violation or denial of civil and human rights. The more specific your examples, the stronger your argument will be.
You could also explain how the civil recognition of same-sex marriage would undermine the institution of marriage. It is important to note that you cannot simply make that assertion and just leave it at that. In order to make this argument credible, you must provide specifics.
And finally, it is prudent to keep your emotions in check and focus upon the practical issues, lest people start to perceive your passionate outbursts as subterfuge intended to disguise the untenability of your position.
109 - Anthony Grande
"Do you think the Recall was mob rule???"
"Yes it was, genius."
O.k. now we are getting somewhere, now Roger do you think that the recall caused "total anarchy"???
______________________________________
Hey Margaret, do you want to here my way of putting my opponents on the defense???
O.K. here it is: THE PEOPLE SPOKE, THEY DO NOT WANT GAY MARRIAGES!!!!!!!
110 - practical joe
Margaret: "The old polygamy ploy? "
Yup.
---
"You mean you don't wish to marry your dog or cat instead? C'mon, you're going to have to do much better than that."
No dog or cat. I just like lots of women.
---
"Here, let me help you."
Don't need any help.
---
"When you engage in a debate, you must present pragmatic arguments and avoid the use of emotional appeals and logical fallacies such as straw men, slippery slopes, red herrings, etc."
I agree.
Homosexuals like what is abnormal. My desire for women is normal.
----
"If you want to make an effective and convincing case against the civil recognition of same-sex marriages, you must place your opponents on the defensive and you must do so decisively."
It seems that I have put you on the defensive.
Dogs and Cats! Indeed!
---
"Here are a few surefire methods for doing just that: You could, for example, demonstrate how the civil recognition of same-sex marriage is a violation or denial of civil and human rights. The more specific your examples, the stronger your argument will be."
The denial of civil rights is when I am prohibited from marrying more than one woman at a time.
---
"You could also explain how the civil recognition of same-sex marriage would undermine the institution of marriage. It is important to note that you cannot simply make that assertion and just leave it at that. In order to make this argument credible, you must provide specifics."
Marriage is an institution set up to maintain our civilization. Not just to have boys play dick and women play whatever it is they play.
---
"And finally, it is prudent to keep your emotions in check and focus upon the practical issues, lest people start to perceive your passionate outbursts as subterfuge intended to disguise the untenability of your position."
Exactly.
111 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Okay, Mr. Grande, I get what you're saying here and FWIW, I even understand why Governor Schwarzenegger felt he needed to veto AB 849.
It would upset the balance of power if the California legislature was allowed to overrule the will of the people who voted for Proposition 22.
However, Proposition 22 is clearly unconstitutional and Judge Kramer's decision to that effect is almost certain to be upheld on appeal in the state Supreme Court -- perhaps all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States -- and that is how the recognition of same-sex marriage will eventually become the law of the land.
That, gentlemen, is the way the balance of power works to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority. America is ultimately ruled by our Constitution.
I mean, really! What's the big deal here? Can't you just get over the fact that some people are homosexual? After all, they've always been with us. Why not just accept these facts of nature with regard to humanity and our various sexualities and get over it?
112 - practical joe
Margaret:
“However, Proposition 22 is clearly unconstitutional and Judge Kramer's decision to that effect is almost certain to be upheld on appeal in the state Supreme Court -- perhaps all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States -- and that is how the recognition of same-sex marriage will eventually become the law of the land.”
Don’t count on Roberts voting for it.
---
“That, gentlemen, is the way the balance of power works to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority.
au contraire!
The balance of power was in the original Constitution -- before the Bill of Rights was written,
---
America is ultimately ruled by our Constitution. “
Yes! Not by activist judges.
---
“I mean, really! What's the big deal here?
Our civilization,
---
“Can't you just get over the fact that some people are homosexual?"
No more than I can get over the fact that some people are polygamists.
---
“After all, they've always been with us.”
Yes. Polygamy has been around a long time.
---
“Why not just accept these facts of nature with regard to humanity and our various sexualities and get over it? “
It’s not in the best interest of our society.
DUH!
113 - Nola
Polygamy is not a form of birth control.
Most polygamous men are DAMN UGLY and DAMN PERVERTED - they end up raping their daughters to add to their collection. Then, we have some DAMN F-D UP BABIES looking like clones running around and overpopulating the planet.
Gay sex is a form of birth control.
Polygamy is a form of gay marriage because 2 women are married to each other and the man. If they kill the husband, they are still married.
114 - John A. Conley
Can anyone come up with a logical reason against same sex marriage WITHOUT the words "Bible" or "God" in it?
115 - Steve S
I mean, really! What's the big deal here?
Our civilization
wow, practical joe, I don't think I've ever met anybody with as so little faith in humanity. No wonder you favor a big brother type, socialistic government in America, punishing/rewarding interpersonal relationships. So if I check off a box on a form saying that I have a family, civilization as we know it will fall, according to practical joe.
The Rights' lack of faith in mankind is so telling. Of course if society realizes that I love someone, then all sorts of doors are open for people to love anything under the moon, huh, joe? What do you think people are, that they are so unable to make decisions for themselves?
116 - Steve S
And I say -- your religion says two men or two women.
(from comment 106).
Well, then, I say you are one clueless individual, practical joe, as I've never promoted my sexual orientation as a faith. It's very sad that you cannot see the difference.
The fact is, people, and using my own situation as an example, gay families are already here. America cannot..unless socialistic nutjobs like practical joe get their way...American cannot take away another person's right to have children. Knowing that, children will be born into all kinds of situations, not just heterosexual families and same-sex families.
The question then becomes, do you want to make all resources available to all the children equally, or as practical joe wants, for only those children born into what HE considers an ideal situation, casting the remaining children aside to be left behind for not having a family that meets with his approval.
WWJD?
117 - Silas Kain
Gay sex is a form of birth control.
So is ignorance. Come to think of it, whacked out extremism legitimizes legal abortion as well.
118 - with karate ill kik ur ass
let the gays get married wat harm will it really do in the world other than upset a bunch of stuck up ,snobish chrstians that believe in something that isnt real anyway.
119 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Is it becoming clear that the opposition has no case whatsoever? Are we beginning to see the caliber of the opposition here as an indicator? What was the name of that river that runs through Egypt?
120 - with karate ill kik ur ass
r u fro gay marriages or against them?
121 - billy
thats the untenable position opponents of gay marriage are in. in the end it all boils down to this "MY version of the bible, as MY priest interprets it,says HE THINKS, gay marriage is wrong"
so ill ram that narrow definition of a single religious book among thousands of religious books, down the throats of all americans.
in the end it is a religious argument and as everyone knows religion is banished from governemtn by the 1st amendment.
122 - with karate ill kik ur ass
billy
i totaly agree. STOP TRYING TO CONVERT US!!!!!!
123 - practical joe
let the polygamists get married wat harm will it really do in the world other than upset a bunch of stuck up ,snobish chrstians that believe in something that isnt real anyway.
124 - billy
if you want to talk about polygamy go to utah. this is about gay marriage. if you want to hump a dog, go talk to rick santorum he wants to also. why throw out things unrelated to the post?
125 - billy
i meant p. joe. he is the master of red herrings. i.e., if we legalize gay marriage, must we also legalize going to mars in a water baloon and teleportation to france via a purple transponder?