Monday May 28, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

California voters approve gay-marriage ban

World Nov. 06, 2008 - 05:00AM JST ( 17 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

17 Comments

0

adaydreamNov. 06, 2008 - 03:41PM JST

I'm disappointed. But it's their state. < :-)
0

moonbeamsNov. 06, 2008 - 05:39PM JST

This has me fuming!

It also passed in my home state, FL (I voted against it).

I grew up being taught that marriage was a union between two people who love each other. So what is wrong with that? Why does it have to be between a man and a woman? Give me one good answer. There is none.

Gays are attracted to each other by the same force of nature that attracts straights.

Is marriage about having children? These days I've been seeing someone who cannot get pregnant. Should women who cannot have children be disallowed to marry?

What is wrong with people?

America, the world, is still full of bigots.

Shame on those who supported this.
0

ImperiumMundiNov. 06, 2008 - 06:45PM JST

if they want gay marriage why don't they go to mexico or canada? are they prejudiced against holding a wedding in a third world country?

they have let barack down.
0

elbudamexicanoNov. 06, 2008 - 06:48PM JST

I am from California and I do not have anything against gays but just look at how much power gays have in the politics of San Francisco. We see how gays have taken over SF politics and well, no thanks. It may sound bigoted but I think is more of a power grab than anything else by gay and lesbian activists.
0

OnTheRecordNov. 06, 2008 - 07:25PM JST

God made men and women different for a reason. california has no right to go against the word of God. marriage is a commitment between a man and a woamn. A marriage is based on different sexes, otherwise it is wrong morally.
0

skipthesongNov. 06, 2008 - 09:10PM JST

right now you have gay organizations pushing their agenda in schools on 1st graders, forcing school libraries to carry homosexual content when they don't even have anything related to heterosexual. As for them being born gay, that argument goes back and forth, just because you decided to accept one side of it doesn't make it right either. the voters spoke, and yes all people deserve equal rights, but how long has marriage been on homosexuals' minds? As well as people have a right to repel laws they don't agree with.

As for transgenders children, come on. You don't play into you kid's, when they are that young, wishes because they simply don't know any better. What's next, a kid wants to be a dog and you bring him to the vet.

Like elbudamexico, I can hang out with gay friends and would never think of hurting one and would go as far as damn killing someone to defend them, but having them talk about a method of sex to my kids is going a bit too far.
0

AzraelNov. 06, 2008 - 09:58PM JST

Skipthesong made quite a concise explanation; I agree with him. People have the right to disagree and to defend what they consider right. Homosexuality remains undefined - is it an imbalance of the body, a choice, a mental disorder? Certainly it is an incongruity of the human body, where body and mind are dissociated. Apparently, there is a great diversity of cases and their characteristics, unlike the standard which is heterosexuality, biologically speaking. In that context, the extent of concessions society gives to such individuals is up to society. People voted against certain measures and that must be quite food for thought for some activists.

"Bigot" is a word too easily tossed around in the name of "political correctness" to bully into silence those who do not agree with the speaker - not because right or wrong, but because some people in minorities think they can insult others with impunity. Disagreeing on such a topic is not being a bigot; it's exercising the right to disagree. Disagree not with violence, but within legal frames and calm discussion. Disagreement does not mean hate. It means a boundary has been reached.
0

romulus3Nov. 06, 2008 - 11:01PM JST

Good. No one needs this gay adoption, gay marriage thing to take hold. For gods sake, marriage is about men, woman and making a family based on having a mother and father not a queen and a fairy. Of course I do not care if people are gay or not but clearly, if you make that life style choice. live with the consequences.

gays have equal rights to everyone now as do other minorities but to eradicate the basic family structure of our entire civilization which has been in place for thousands and thousands of years for the sake of a minority will do nothing for our world but destroy our basic social fabric which is the only thing holding our collective civilizations together.

I like the NZ model of civil union rather than marriage and adoption should be off limits. In this case the child does not have a choice rather than nature playing its most important role.
0

romulus3Nov. 07, 2008 - 12:17AM JST

Gay people know that they are gay by nature

Again I state about Gay adoption, where is the choice for the child already born? At least a child conceived naturally can grow up and choose to be gay but a hetro child cast into a gay environment is gonna leave some emotional scars.
0

goodDonkeyNov. 07, 2008 - 11:14AM JST

adaydream and moonbeams I agree with you and I wanted my voice to be counted. I could present many arguments concerning the comments about both gay marriage and gay adoption but I would need to quote endless statistics that tell the real truth and because it would be considered off topic my hard work would be removed.

I remember when gay hatred was acceptable. It is obvious from several comments here that a lot of progress towards tolerance has been achieved. If I tried to ram my thoughts down other peoples throats it would be counterproductive.

I must say I know adults with kids who had gay parents and they are just fine. I have had discussions with them for the very purpose of refuting such trash like "a hetro child cast into a gay environment is gonna leave some emotional scars." There were no such scars but I am quite sure that someone could invent them to prove to the world that they must exist because it defies the word of god or whatever other rational they choose to subscribe to.
0

skipthesongNov. 07, 2008 - 11:42AM JST

I must say I know adults with kids who had gay parents and they are just fine." That's true and I know kids who were adopted into hetro households and that particular couple engaged in some pretty nasty sexual activities while kids were at home. So, I am not going to argue that point.

My gripe is 1. Nambla, which has a lot of support from gay politicians, 2. Let me decide when to talk to my kid about sex and let me bring up the idea about gay sexuality - not some gay politician who feels 1st graders should understand about gays - the life is about a preference of sex (even love too). I would prefer my kid makes her choice self consciencly instead of being swayed.

If people think I am so closed minded, let me see how open you are to the following: 1. parent and children marriage is legal in a few countries - agree or disagree providing that both of age?
2. In several countries, men can marry girls as young as 9 years old - agree or disagree 3. In many countries brothers and sisters can get married - agree or disagree? 4. In some cultures, girls don't get to choose who they marry - agree or disagree? 5. In some cultures, humans can actually be married to animals - agree or disagree?

Well, I hope you don't disagree with any one of the above, because if you do, you are now hereby considered a bigot!
0

romulus3Nov. 07, 2008 - 12:25PM JST

goodDonkey,

I must say I know adults with kids who had gay parents and they are just fine.

that is not my point. My point is being adopted into a gay household. If my wife and I were to die I would hate it that our son could be adopted into a gay household without being able to understand and make a choice himself. That is the flaw in gay adoption. After being in a normal family structure and to be cast into an abnormal unnatural family structure would most definitely cause him harm on top of losing his parents.
0

elbudamexicanoNov. 07, 2008 - 06:25PM JST

California is a democracy, but I think San Francisco has gone way too far. Look up NAMDA?LAMDA? I can't remember exactly but here militant homosexuals have the mottoe of "Sex before 8 or it is too late" this meaning that MEN having sex with little BOYS before 8 years of age is their goal! This guys are in San Francsico, etc..and these guys are very, very sick! So, take a guess why we voted against gay marriage.
0

BlackFlagNov. 08, 2008 - 01:24AM JST

california has no right to go against the word of God

says who? God? the minority who 'hear' his voice? here we go again...
0

Good_JorbNov. 08, 2008 - 02:12AM JST

eradicate the basic family structure of our entire civilization

My wife and I live in Canada, about a year we ran into some gay aquitances who we found out had recently been married. Upon hearing this our wedding certificate spontaneously combusted, her womb become barren and I stopped loving my wife. Hetrosexual people have already sullied the sanctity of marriage to the point where it no longer means the same thing that it once use to mean.