Posted 16 Oct 2008 Many people may be turning on the TV and seeing ads for saying yes to prop 8 to protect marriage. Meaning Gay Marriages are illegal/not allowed in California. To be honest I myself say no to it here is why, If a Man and a Woman love each other then they are in love. If a Man and a Man love each other then they are in love. There really isn't a difference is there? love = love. Meaning that if a Man can marry/love a Woman then why can't a Man love/marry a Man? It's like saying, If you own a house then you are a normal person but if you don't own a house then you are trash. I don't know everyone here that lives in California except for maybe 1 (SJ). If you have turned on the TV and seen the commercial of the little girl running to her mom saying that she can marry a princess (because that's what she learned in school) so what. They are going to learn anyways sooner or later. There is a class in California that is required in some (many) school districts and it's called Health or Sex Ed. The purpose of this class is to let them know, to educate them about life. We are not telling them "Now because the Little Girl married the Princess all little girls will grow up to marry and love princesses), no. We are informing them. what do you guys say? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 16 Oct 2008 I would vote no personally. This is pretty much the gay-marriage topic, but good point nonetheless. No. I'd vote no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 16 Oct 2008 I'm 15. I can't leagally vote. I would vote... I don't know. It is in California, and I'm not in California so I still don't know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 17 Oct 2008 Yeah, but I'm 15 too. And I live in Scotland. But I still have an opinion. What's yours? Which way would you vote if you had the chance? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 17 Oct 2008 I'm 15. I can't leagally vote. I would vote... I don't know. It is in California, and I'm not in California so I still don't know. You cannot turn a blind eye just because it doesn't affect you directly or the area you live in... I'd vote no to Proposition 8. Tappy has pretty much said all the good points I was about to type...so might as well save my energy... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 17 Oct 2008 I'd vote nay. If the government is going to give legal benefits to male-female relationships, they have to extend them to male-male and female-female or else it's discrimination, plain and simple. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 17 Oct 2008 You cannot turn a blind eye just because it doesn't affect you directly or the area you live in... I'd vote no to Proposition 8. Tappy has pretty much said all the good points I was about to type...so might as well save my energy... Exactly what I was trying to say. I just took ages to do so... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 17 Oct 2008 Oh well then, no. I would vote no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 17 Oct 2008 Good. I would like to think that all sensible people would vote no. It's just the right answer. And most would probably agree... I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 26 Oct 2008 Yeah I am from California and using an absentee ballet (I'm abroad right now), I'm voting no. Personally, I just hate the idea of the state telling these people these people they can get married, and those people they can't. I thought it was really cool when the Supreme Court overturned this, but now if this proposition passes, I will lose a lot of respect for my fellow Californians. We are supposed to be one of the more progressive states, and if it's not allowed there... I just don't think that's setting the right example. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 26 Oct 2008 I'd vote yes. If they want people to be tolerant of their opinions they have to be tolerant of others, how ever offensive it is. Otherwise you're the one doing the discrimination. If schools are teaching homosexuality, children will grow up to be homosexual as they think it's the norm. Thus leading to a low human populace, if it's continued to be accepted up to the point of more than 75% of the human populace turns homosexual as a result. This is how stuff works: One state accepts it then most of them follow foot, a national bill is passed then other nations start following foot since it seems like a good idea at the time, next thing you know, most of the world is homosexual and hetrosexuality is a minority, hardly any new generations are born since homosexuality is widely taught and accepted. Then the human race starts to diminish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 26 Oct 2008 I doubt schools teaching about homosexuality will turn students into gays. It's like saying you're learning about the bible. It doesn't mean you'll turn religious. Heterosexuality is also unlikely to become rare. After all, that's natural in humans to want to breed and reproduce. It's more likely that homosexuality will still be a minority. Accepting it doesn't mean you have to become it. I accept gays...I'm straight. I highly doubt that will change in my lifetime. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 26 Oct 2008 If schools are teaching homosexuality, children will grow up to be homosexual as they think it's the norm. This is actually a misconception. The proposition doesn't include any mention of schools or education. However, your point that we should respect everyone's opinion is valid. But I think the main reason one would have to vote no on Prop 8 is what the proposition reads: "ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY." Now I don't get this, America is a country that is supposed to be about the principle of equality. Why would anyone vote on something that eliminates the rights of one group of people so it stays exclusive to another group of people? To me this seems ludicrous and completely unconstitutional. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 26 Oct 2008 next thing you know, most of the world is homosexual and hetrosexuality is a minority, hardly any new generations are born since homosexuality is widely taught and accepted. Then the human race starts to diminish. WoOoOoOo, ominous, vague and highly unlikely threat approaching. And you're forgetting. 1) The majority are stubborn, close-minded, traditional-keeping people. 2) People normally grow up with the dream of one day having children (Including homosexuals) 3) The human race diminishing is a good thing for a lot of organisms. ie - everyone else. Homosexuality is by no means commonplace, and it probably won't be, because Christianity/discriminatory religion is commonplace. Besides, what school in hell teaches you how to have intimate relationship? I've not once heard, "Hey, you have to date girls" in my entire student career. Closest thing to that is sex ed, and that's basically just a session that tells you to wear condoms and get tested and whatnot. Also, yes, NAC, I've always wondered about that. The Constitution says you have the right to pursue happiness. One of the rights you're born with and you die with. For me, happiness is being with the one you love. So why should this be a problem? Sahaqiel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 26 Oct 2008 You seem to be forgetting: Worst case scenario. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
