Comments for Matthews: Homosexuals want same love and respect others seek at http://lakeconews.com , comment 1 to 15 out of 15 comments http://lakeconews.com Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:47:08 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9811 [quote]\"The will of the majority of the people not the few.\"[/quote] angisangels, The US is more than a democracy -- it is a [i]constitutional[/i] democracy. This means our government is designed to not only express the will of the majority, but also simultaneously protect the unalienable rights of minorities and the powerless. Regardless of anyone\'s religious beliefs, the Constitution of the United States demands all Americans be granted equal rights. The solution appears simple to me: split marriage into 2 its two components: religious and legal. Let each faith decide what \"religious marriage\" is and marry accordingly. \"Legal marriage\" should be licensed by the government and protect the rights of all people to have whatever their definition of \"religious marriage\" happens to be. The license for \"legal marriage\" should be granted, perfected and protected by the government, not by any faith or its ministers. And, the United States is NOT a Christian country. It is a country of religious freedom, where EVERYONE is afforded the protection of the US Constitution and allowed find their own path to God. Now is no time to divide. We must find ways to come together and love each other if we are to solve the problems facing today\'s world. - ccolelewis Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:37:44 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9247 Is there anyway to debate this issue without using the Bible? If you are using the Bible to support your side, whichever that may be, I will tune you out. Get over it. We do not want our laws based on how you interpret the Bible. Can\'t we SEPARATE the two??? - jmadison Sun, 23 Nov 2008 18:54:18 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9223 seem to have a direct line would you ask the big dude why he keeps making the gays if he is so against them? And do tell, how much did you get for your daughters when you sold them? How many slaves do you own? - \"as described in the Bible\". - Donna Christopher Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:31:07 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9222 is a sin against God and man. An abomination as described in the Bible. There is no marriage for same-sex people. - elmerf Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:09:39 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9219 confusion over which Constitution is being amended (perhaps). If you want to raise taxes in California it takes a two thirds majority. If you want to deny a group of people certain rights, it only takes a simple majority (emphasis on simple). One of the problems with civil unions is that many hospital only allow \'immediate family members\' into see some patients, not immediate co-signators of the civil union. While some hospitals may allow it others won\'t. What happens if you are out of state? Your rights will vary from state to state. While the 10 Commandments are a pretty good rule of thumb for daily living the greater the distance between goverment and god the better off we will be. Just look back at the last 8 years and what a \'man of faith\' has done to this country and this world. And don\'t forget his fervant fellow fundie - Osama Bin Laden. The Civil Rights movement in this country caused the rise of the Dixiecrats - a fun group of folks who went to their graves still angry that not only had slavery been outlawed but now we were giving equal rights to \'them\'. Prop 8 had nothing to do with protecting traditional families or marriages - it is about discrimination. Anyone that feels that Lenny having the right to get married endangers their marriage has a marriage that is in trouble and that trouble does not stem from same sex marriage by others. - Donna Christopher Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:47:36 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9218 my bad, prop 8 did pass I was so upset with the stipidity of people who do not understand our law system and the difference from church and state that I mistyped what i was thinking the long and the short of it. you can\'t make an apple out of an orange even if you think it is the apples right. marriage is defined in the law not in the church and it says between man and woman no one else. To change this would require that all states in the union pass and amendment to the constitution. That it democracy. The will of the majority of the people not the few. The courts can\'t just decide that it is unfair. There is a lot of things that groups of people want to be allow to do that does not make it their right. If they tried to make it into a religious fight than we would have chaos throughout our court system. the people of California voted against homosexual marriage it should be left at that. - angisangels Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:53:02 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9216 Apparently Taximom you do not watch TV. A striking example of hate crimes against the elderly is with activists using physical force against defenseless little old ladies. Or the property damage perpetrated against those who supported prop 8. Or out and out intimidation of woman business owners where even apologies and tears is not acceptable enough. Whether you agree that the judges are activist is not relevant. What is relevant is this tying in blacks into your arguement. There is not a relationship in law to the entire issue at hand here. Gays are not being denied any rights, in fact, they refuse to excersise their rights. In regards to zealousness, the vile intimidation being spewed against any who disagree on the the issue is perverse. In fact it only reinforces the fact that the anti 8 crowd is nothing but hatred for fellow citizens. The activists do not follow rule of law yet they claim they want to have the law on their side. You cite the constitution in your smarmish response, yet, you fail to acknowledge that the very premise fails in the fact the court has made no decision. As for liberals giving me freedoms? That is laughable. It was the conservatives that endowed me with the right to vote. It was the conservatives that that granted me equal stature with whites. If not for them I suspect Jim Crow would be alive and well in America. In addressing your inbred hatred for all religions, well you are a religion in yourself. The anti religion movement is as much of a religion as any other organized religion. The only difference being, you are in violation of the constitution in your indoctrinating your beliefs into the government. - bearer Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:26:16 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9210 [quote]people that don\'t fit with in the law[/quote] What the heck does THAT mean??? Do only some people deserve to be protected by our laws? I bet I can find some reason to exclude you from protection of the law, peaches. Maybe you dont \'fit\' my definition of who deserves protection. Do you have blue eyes, are you left handed,or perhaps you didn\'t graduate high school (very likely given your poor understanding of the constitution and your trouble with getting your verbs and nouns to match in a sentence.) Or maybe, in my estimation, you went to the wrong school or lived in the wrong town or your dad worked at the wrong job. Or maybe I just don\'t like the way you hold your steak knife. Who appointed you the arbiter of who and who does not get protected by the law? And YES we can change laws that we think are unfair and are proven unfair - it\'s called Democracy. And by the way you nincompoop Propostion 8 PASSED - that\'s what this whole dialog is about. - taxismom Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:29:19 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9208 there is some confusion about two things first thing is that marriage is a legal issue define by the california code family division 300. (a) Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary. Consent alone does not constitute marriage. Consent must be followed by the issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by this division, except as provided by Section 425 and Part 4 (commencing with Section 500) as it is specific to a man and a woman homosexuals do not fit within the criteria of the law. Secondly God does talk about loving one another but he never accept sin (regardless what the sin is) but this is a legal issue. Homosexuals are not a protected class under the constitution. they are not being Discrimination against protected classes are race, religion, sex (boy or girl not how you have sex) and national origin. You must have 2/3 of the states ratified to change these laws. This is not about religion or discrimination you can twist the truth you can feel sorry for the people that don\'t fit with in the law but the whole state voted and Prop 8 was defeated. you want to change every law for such a small issue than become a congressman and start creating bills but this country can\'t change every law that some one thinks is unfair or who don\'t agree with it. Next people will lobby to have multiply wives now that is in some religions. - angisangels Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:03:14 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9198 for this claim? [quote]There is less violence aimed at gays then we see the in gay movement against heteros. [/quote] please go back to 8th grade civics and learn what the 3 branches of government are for -- pay special attention to the establishment clause -- and equally to the ruling of Marbury v. Madison. It formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution. This \'activist judge\' trope is tired and old. The real issue is not the activism of judges but the principles upon which they are acting. Principles like the RULE OF LAW not MEN What the right resents is what the framers of the Constitution intended—a judiciary able to serve as a counterweight to popular passions. when people throw around the \"activist judge\" meme, what they are really doing is accusing that judge of ruling based on his or her own personal belief system, rather than according to the law. ergo --w/o court ruling african americans in the US would still be living under Jim Crow laws. It is my observation that the zealousness of the \"Yes on 8\" campaign has unleashed a spirit of pride and political opportunism in religious congregations. The \"Yes on 8\" campaign asked us to eliminate the current legal rights of thousands of actual families in California. Even though they have described the initiative as a \"protection\" for heterosexual marriage, the actual language and impact of the law (considered strictly and soberly) have nothing to do with strengthening heterosexual families. Instead, Proposition 8 eliminated the legal protections of marriage for same-sex couple families. Through doctrinal lenses, we may not see gay families as families that will survive into the eternities. But to gay spouses, children, and other relatives, gay families are vital families. If we are to act with honesty and integrity, we must take sober responsibility for the fact that \"Yes on 8\" eliminates the rights of actually existing families. The \"Yes on 8\" campaign, strictly and honestly considered, [u]is a mission of destruction. We must consider carefully what it means to undertake a mission of destruction in the name of God.[/u] In the Old Testament, Jonah asked God to destroy the city of Nineveh, and God gently rebuffed him, reminding him that even Nineveh was beloved (Jonah 4:11). The scriptures caution repeatedly that when we engage on spiritual errands, and especially those that bring judgment against our neighbors, we are at great risk of indulging our own self-righteousness and spiritual pride. We must do so with a great spirit of repentance, caution, and humility. And yet nothing in the spirit of the \"Yes on 8\" campaign as I have witnessed it obliges us to undertake this kind of repentant self searching. I have seen instead a sense of accomplishment, triumphalism, and pride in the reach of our financial and worldly power. I have not seen the humility and godly sorrow God expected of Jonah. God is also the God of gay and lesbian people; they are as beloved of him as any others. - taxismom Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:19:11 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9197 The great irony in this whole Prop8 thing and the very insightful things you pointed out in your article is that according to 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code a tax exempt institution such as a church \"may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.\" According to \"Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct.\" And, therefore, most of the groups who pushed this prop8 agenda were walking a VERY fine line. Now, granted, the churches and other tax exempt groups may or may not have \"lobbied\" (definition - influenced a politician to take a desired action) the politicians (as it would have done little good as the politicians were not the ones in charge of the vote) but I can pretty much bet quite a few of them influenced their \"flock\" or \"group\" to take their desired action. - purplegirl Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:09:21 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9196 [quote]So what is the greatest commandment? “To love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength.” Second, “To love your neighbor as you love yourself.”[/quote] Thanks for this reminder, Lenny! We get so stuck in the dogma, we forget the true Purpose of a faith - ANY faith – is "to Love one Another". This is at the root of every major religion. Let\'s all put love at the center of our thoughts and actions. Join the worldwide movement (initiated by Karen Armstrong as the 2008 Ted Prize winner) to re-institute the Golden Rule as our religious cornerstone: [url]http://charterforcompassion.com[/url] All the Best, Carol Carol Cole-Lewis President, Unitarian Universalist Community of Lake County [url]http://www.uuclc.org[/url] - ccolelewis Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:09:15 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9191 Separate but Equal has already been stricken down - a very long time ago. And this prop will be overturned also. This issue will wend it way to the SCOTUS where I doubt even Noni Scalia will be wanting to upend the elimination of Separate but Equal - he\'d lose his good buddy coke can Clarence. Great article Lenny. - Donna Christopher Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:07:58 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9187 some churches use love to build their flock, others use hate. Fear and hate are great motivaters as the right-wing \"Christians\" have found, and the gays are about the last people they can feel good about hating, as it is generally unfashionable to hate Jews or blacks (unless of course you\'re from the old South). As long as the churches can use the \"gay menace\" to fill the pews and collection plates they will, and the repubs love to use the gays too, because they are a great way to fire-up the base and get them into a voting booth. Without anti-gay hate Al Gore would have won, so would John Kerry, we can thank Karl Rove for getting all those anti-gay ballot measures on battleground state\'s ballots. It\'s OK to send some of that hate back in the direction it came from (Utah), to the same people who gave the wars their complete support (see what phoney Christians they are?). Utah is the reddest state in the nation and is run like a religious fiefdom, let\'s keep our tourist dollars out of there as long as they keep defiling the name of Christ and see how they like being a minority group that is looked down upon. And bearer: if you have ANY civil rights you have a liberal to thank, the \"consevatives\" never stand up for the constitution any more! - smurf Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:26:07 +0100 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6404/925/#comment-9186 Very well written until the very end. This is not about civil rights. You are afforded the same exact rights as any other citizen. You choose not to excersise that right. As to your point about unions with a same sex partner, well you have the rights and legal responsibilities under current civil partnerships, including being sued by your partner if your relationship ends. The civil union is a clear designation of difference between \"church and state\" yet you want recognition in termanology defined buy church. No one confines you to certain areas to eat, drink or commute. There is less violence aimed at gays then we see the in gay movement against heteros. Frankly, I believe the activist court will probably strike down prop 8. The courts no longer rule on the rule of law but rather legislate to appease the agenda. No “fundamentalist” court has ever told me how to live my life. Liberal activists on the other hand have told me what to buy, where to buy, what to eat, what to watch, what to read, what to listen to, what to drive, where to live, and what to wear. - bearer Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:30:00 +0100