Arnold Schwarzenegger is getting crazy!!!
 

Today i saw on the dutch television that Arnold Scharzenegger wants to reject the gay marriage....

I'm 100% straight myself, but i respect the people who are gay.
And i think they are allowed to marry if they want!
Schwarzenegger is following his "Boss" Bush and wants to stop this kind of marriage.

What is wrong with a marriage between a man and a man or a girl and a girl???

I think the most important is that everybody is happy right?
Nomather if you're gay or straight....

Some of my best friends are gay and i don't have any problem with that, the most important to me is that they are happy with their life!

What do you think?

Is somebody who's gay having a discease or do you respect them for who they are?

I think we should respect everybody for whatever he/she is!!

men are supposed to be with women...women are supposed to be with men...thats the way it fucking works...whether you're a religious nut or a scientific person its the same shit...thats how it was meant to be...

Please shoot yourself in the face.


Anyone with similar views please do the same.


Thank You.

Who the fuck cares who marries who. Governments should not try to legislate morals.

well no shit.

:thumbsup

fuck all this fag bullshit!

You obvioulsy have no concept of the legalities involved with a marrage in the US...

Its has nothign to do with moroals.

You are missing the point. These people are breaking the law.
Scharzenegger has sworn to uphold the law.

:Graucho

Listen, I shudder when two mens cocks touch each other in a DP scene, but WTF "meant to be" who "meant" it to be that way?

the world is afraid of change

if people are born in a world where gay marriage is allowed, they wouldnt question it

that's my :2 cents:

Yean and kids who grow up in the ghetto are used to homless poeple, crackheads, shootings, gangs, ECT. Doesnt mean we should allow those things to take place everywhere.

How does CA law define marriage?

Only question that matters.

After looking around to make sure california was still in the US, yes I know the legalities involved.

Oh no they can claim each other on taxes.

Holy shit they can get medical insurance as a spouse.

Damn they could adopt unwanted kids easier and both have parental rights.

Well fuck they could visit and or sign papers in the event of a medical tragedy.

And crap they can get divorced, loose half their shit and pay alimony.

Marrage is religious simple as that. California already accepts a version of civil unions.

Yea, that sounds reasonable........
IF we were still living in an age were all that mattered was the proliferation of your genes.
I'd like to think we have come alot further than that.

invitro fertilization goes against the "natural" way of conception.

Nowadays, I thought alot of people fell in love with who and what was inside. I don't care if they can get married or not, it's not a big deal. Just the ACLU trying to make a point for precedence in the future.

I don't think you should mess with a persons ability to choose whom and how they spend their time with.

You should just be happy and thankful that you are lucky enough to find someone you care about and who cares about you.

just my two cents, now you can tell me to STFU.

He's like Bush! damn! :(

Go Arnold !!!

http://iwannacum.com/nono.jpg

hmm seems that he dont like gays.
i dont live in the us, so i dont care :p
the only i know:

homesexuals are gay.

Who is this "we" you speak of?

Way to completely miss the issue...

:thumbsup

Ya, in the U.S. it is defined by as between man-woman. They can have civil union, which grant the same right, but no marriage license.

:1orglaugh

Me as a fucking taxpayer.


The MAJORITY of us are not gay. The majority of us don't want gay marrage. The only reason the mayor of wackytown is acting like this is becasue he will get re-elected. Just becasue SF is packed full of fudge packers.


The stupid thing is nationwide all these morons are doing is increasing the number of poeple agasint gay marriage.

Thanks! I pride myself on trying to circumvent the real issue at hand so as to try and take away heat from any real progress that may be getting done.....especially if that progress isn't going to jive with my agenda.

EXactly!!!

SO what the fuck is thier proglem???


They are stiring shit... becase they WANT to call what they do Normal and they want to equate it with a man/woman relationship...


ITS NOT... PERIOD.


It all plays into the comlex every gay person has. The never ending justification for thier lifestyle.

Dont gay people pay taxes too?

And yes the majority of people are straight, doesnt mean the majority is always right.

P.S. they just made interracial marrage legal in Georgia 2 years ago.

de·moc·ra·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies
Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
Majority rule.
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.


EDIT: don't try and twist the last defenition about "respecting" the individual... were not talkign about taking thier rights... were talking about not calling what they have a marriage... BECASUE ITS FUCKING NOT!!!!!!!

Actually isnt is them saying they just want to be like others and be normal?

Wow, how crazy! He is actually upholding the law, and representing the peoples views - what a fucking nut case!

Gays = fine

Gay marriage = oxymoron

If that was the case women wouldnt have gained right to vote, blacks would still be slaves, kids would be in color seperated schools ect. Tis the reason we have a constitution and a supreme court. To do what the majority doesnt like.

You may have had a point...

if we didn't live in a constitutional republic.

Wtf?


I don't even know how to respond to that.

You making random assumptions about how things "would be", nothing more.



And no... that sno the reason we have a constitution and a supreme court. Thats quite possibly the lamest thing I've read tonight.


EDIT: BTW a constitutional republic still relys on majority rule (unless the majority want to violate the constitution, even then it can be amended).... I'm starting to see why I had broke on ignore.

Point was each of those things were in the minority despite what the majority wanted.

This whole argument is no different than the ones that went on with interracial marrages.

If majority always won bush wouldnt be in office now would he?

An interracial couple can have a child.... Yoru trying to use one injusitice to justify somthing that is NOT RELATED.

The moment 2 lesbians or 2 gay men have a baby without some kind of medical intervention is the day that I'm all for gay marriage.

Did I SAY "majority alwasy win" becasue i dont recall it.


Ok so far not one valid arguemnt... so I'm done in this thread. (unless somone actually makes a valid point supporting gay marrage)

why isn't this fucking judge in jail or out of a job?
he broke the fucking law.
like the judge with the 10 commandments monument.
he broke the fucking law.
where's he now?



what's more offensive? marriages of the unnatural, or a piece of stone with some ancient words on it, that if most people even stopped to read would probably wonder what the fucking big deal was in the first place.

They will have to face God in the end...sinners :BangBang:

What do making babies have to do with it?

They can adopt, seems simple enough.

Yet hmmm if the requirement for marrage is the ability to make babies does that mean an infertle woman or man shouldnt be allowed to get married?

misery loves company . . . . let them get married

You are not telling me anything I don't know. Put me on ignore if you want... I'll lose no sleep. I'm not the one that went to dictionary.com to back my position.






What's funny I share your opinion...

I just know better than to argue with the gay crowd that won't take anything but 'marriage'.

I personally do not care if they do or dont. Its just fun to argue.

Good question:

CALIFORNIA CODES
FAMILY.CODE
SECTION 300-310




300. 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).

from here

But the poor kid will be teased to death!

I can see the grade school kids now "You got two daddies, Haha"

Kids can be cruel!

Poor fucker would probably commit suicide by 16

edit (it left out my remark)

Doesnt mention baby production, just man and woman so in theory it would be discrimination which in itself is illegal.

So all of the SF 'marriages' are not legal.

Good I hate kids and I hate paying more taxes because the majority keep having them, and getting special tax treatment because they do.

the funniest thing about this is mirriam webster online...


It used to say:

1 a: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage

now it says:

1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage


amazing! they changed the fucking dictionary.

<img src="http://orr.justblow.us/images/You're_a_homo.jpg">

exactly, you are catching on :thumbsup

what the hell are you talking about? baby production?