rchapstick Posted June 3, 2008 Report Share Posted June 3, 2008 But I'm a lesbian trapped inside a man's body, so it's OK... Cheers, SD You mean like this? (go from 1:35 to 2:15) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted June 3, 2008 Report Share Posted June 3, 2008 "Video not available" Cheers, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rchapstick Posted June 3, 2008 Report Share Posted June 3, 2008 Hmmm, I get it just fine. Maybe Thailand is blocking YouTube again. Google "Eddie Izzard Male Lesbian", his bit from "Dress to Kill" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 Gay marriage ban qualifies for California ballot SAN FRANCISCO (AP) â?? California's Secretary of State says an initiative that would again outlaw gay marriage in the state has qualified for the November ballot. Debra Bowen says a random check of signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed that they had gathered enough for it to be put to voters. The measure would amend the state constitution to define marriage as a union "between a man and a woman." It would overturn the recent California Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state if it is approved by a majority of voters on Nov. 4. California public health officials already have amended marriage license applications and told local officials to start issuing them to same-sex couples on June 17. ------------------------------- What this article fails to make clear is that the current ballot measure is a proposed Amendment to the California State Constitution. Thus, if it passes, it will not merely "again outlaw gay marriage" but rather will render such marriage unconstitutional, taking away the ability of the State Supreme Court to again override the will of the people. I predict this measure will pass in November 53-47. Looks like the RYs & HHs et al don't like the truth and want to get this to pass via subterfuge. The proposition is truthfully described on the ballot as "Eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry." But the truth, they apparently fear, is something that is too inflammatory. So they sued the State of California for telling the truth about what the ballot proposal does. The lawsuit claims that "the ballot language is inflammatory". But the ballot language simply describes what the proposition does. So truth is inflammatory? I guess it is if you are a GOPer, eh? But no matter. It is polling strongly of being defeated: Cheers, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 Why all the "queer fear?" What is more important? health care? pension protections? Job security? job outsourcing? off shore drilling? Nuclear program? or to dudes who want to make their relationship legal, and give them the same rights as everyone else? The gays will still be gay, still have gay sex, and nothing will be any better or worse for it. Meanwhile, the country is going to hell, and all anyone is concerned about is gay marriage? Like many on this board, I am or have been in interracial relationships, and gotten shit for it. This racist shit is the same school of thought that the anti gay crowd sells. Hence, I feel a need to stand with the gays and lesbians on this, and defend their rights, as I would want them to defend mine. Wasn't until 1948 that California lifted the ban/changed the laws regarding the marriage between whites and Chinese. Wasn't until the late 90's that the last state repealed their bann on black men marrying white women, all part of the same ignorance and hatred. Pisses me off that this is still even an issue, who cares what 2 people do as long as they are consenting adults? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 The ballot language matters little and the current polling matters not at all. This is not an issue where campaigning will change people's positions. It is a matter of the voters becoming aware that the issue is on the ballot and then it is all about turnout - who shows up to vote. Right now awareness of the issue is low. By November everyone will know what's at stake. I expect it to pass but if it doesn't then so be it. The point is to let the people of California govern themselves and not be dictated to by appointed judges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted August 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 I look at it that there is 'nothing at stake' on this issue. The government should not be in the position of dictating what consenting adults can and can not due. For example, in some States, having oral sex between consenting adults is a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 Gay marriage ban qualifies for California ballot SAN FRANCISCO (AP) â?? California's Secretary of State says an initiative that would again outlaw gay marriage in the state has qualified for the November ballot. Debra Bowen says a random check of signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed that they had gathered enough for it to be put to voters. The measure would amend the state constitution to define marriage as a union "between a man and a woman." It would overturn the recent California Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state if it is approved by a majority of voters on Nov. 4. California public health officials already have amended marriage license applications and told local officials to start issuing them to same-sex couples on June 17. ------------------------------- What this article fails to make clear is that the current ballot measure is a proposed Amendment to the California State Constitution. Thus, if it passes, it will not merely "again outlaw gay marriage" but rather will render such marriage unconstitutional, taking away the ability of the State Supreme Court to again override the will of the people. I predict this measure will pass in November 53-47. You could pass a constitutional amendment to make it legal to shoot your bitching wife. I have no doubt that it would be overturned in state court, no matter if it was the will of the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 You could pass a constitutional amendment to make it legal to shoot your bitching wife. I have no doubt that it would be overturned in state court, no matter if it was the will of the people. If the November ballot initiative passes it will amend the Californis State Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage in California. This simply cannot be overturned in State court since the court's authority is subsidiary to the State Constitution. In other words, if the State Constitution says something, then that is the way it is. In the past the State courts overturned bans on same-sex marriage that were enacted as part of state law. State law is subject to judicial review to determine whether it is in accordance with the State Constitution. By definition the State Constitution is necessarily in accordance with itself and therefore it is not subject to judicial review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted August 3, 2008 Report Share Posted August 3, 2008 Help me out here: if I am a 45 year old guy named Jesus Rodriquez living in the Central Valley, how do I supposed to vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.