Apparently it's overrated, cause everyone and their mom is sick. Half of my sorority is this way not to mention the disease-ridden school I attend. Sinus headaches suck so hard. I think I'm gonna take a nap and quickly end this entry, now.
Which ramifications occur due to the proposition. My friend did research with the proposition itself and found that most of the arguments FOR the proposition are direct lies:
Prop 8 - "Pro" arguments and researched rebuttals
My first note was an op-ed and if you haven't read it please do so. This note is researched base and deals solely with facts. Let me clarify, these are not "facts" as seen on the pro- and anti- prop 8 websites, these are personally researched and backed by (and linked to) the Primary Source. Because of that I felt it needed its own note, as to garner the most attention possible, so everyone may be well educated in true facts. As always, feel free to debate and discuss. But please, no more copying and pasting talking points. Please provide supporting evidence for any claims made.
1. "Voting No on prop 8 will mean that churches will be forced to marry same sex couples" This is simply not true. Here is a DIRECT QUOTE from the ruling handed down by the supreme court, “Finally, affording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 4.)” If you'd like to see it for yourselves, here is the official ruling, and it can be found on page 117, lines 8-13. http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/california_court_overturns_ban_on_gay_marriage_051408.pdf Now I would like to take this opportunity to point out the difference between copying and pasting the talking points of your side and researching. I'm not trying to belittle any one person, because both sides of every issue do this. But please, be critical of everything you read, unless it's "primary evidence" (as is the judge's ruling I have presented)
2. "It IS already happening and pastors are being sued, taken to jail, etc. for not complying" This is a flat out lie, another completely false talking point. Nowhere in our country has this happened. If you are concerned it might happen in the future please refer to the quote in the prior point
3. "What would you think if we were to remove laws that we do have against murder, stealing, rape, etc.?" The answer to this can be found in my original note, in the paragraph talking about freedom. "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." (Chief Justice Oliver Holmes). All these things are illegal because they harm someone else. Homosexuality is quite safe.
4. "voting NO is not just saying "I don't think we should force them to follow what God wants," but more so "I support/ am okay with that sin." Not true, Voting no is voting against forcing our beliefs upon an unbelieving world. Yes, the freedom in America is faltered, and we as Christians have the perfect freedom. But if we force our freedom upon others, it is by definition not freedom to them. We are called to be a light upon the hill, not a vindicating firestorm
5. "a civil union gives homosexual couples the same rights as a heterosexual marriage" It is actually called a Domestic Partnership, but regardless, civil union and domestic partnership are both not the same as marriage. They are different, they are separate. So this argument advocates "Separate but equal" which by definition "is inherently unequal" (Chief Justice Warren in Brown v. Board of Education) (Also, I can't help but note how this strengthens even further the parallel with Civil Rights)
6. "Teachers will be required to teach about homosexuality ideology at all ages and in all subjects." As Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley puts it, this claim is "false and misleading". Again, I will not make my case with anti-8 "facts". I have researched and found the actual law that this is referring to. And here it is http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/sen/sb_0051-0100/sb_71_bill_20031001_chaptered.html In it, it lays out the framework for sex education and nowhere does it say anything about teaching about same sex marriage to kindergarten students. Schools can choose when and if to teach about these things.
7. "...and parents will have NO say in it what so ever" Yet another flat out lie. This is referring to Massachusetts. We are California. In California parents have every right to know exactly what their children are being taught and to pull them out of anything they don't agree with. Evidence? It so happens to be in the same law as the last point
Thanks for the educated input. I'll just keep this simple: With all matters of God aside, I'm voting YES on Prop. 8 because 4 judges exercised an unlawful amount of power. If you'll recall, the general will of the people has been invalidated from preceeding elections, primarily with Prop. 22.
That's a fact any voter would know, whether politically inclined or not.
2 comments:
Which ramifications occur due to the proposition.
My friend did research with the proposition itself and found that most of the arguments FOR the proposition are direct lies:
Prop 8 - "Pro" arguments and researched rebuttals
My first note was an op-ed and if you haven't read it please do so. This note is researched base and deals solely with facts. Let me clarify, these are not "facts" as seen on the pro- and anti- prop 8 websites, these are personally researched and backed by (and linked to) the Primary Source. Because of that I felt it needed its own note, as to garner the most attention possible, so everyone may be well educated in true facts. As always, feel free to debate and discuss. But please, no more copying and pasting talking points. Please provide supporting evidence for any claims made.
1. "Voting No on prop 8 will mean that churches will be forced to marry same sex couples" This is simply not true. Here is a DIRECT QUOTE from the ruling handed down by the supreme court, “Finally, affording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 4.)” If you'd like to see it for yourselves, here is the official ruling, and it can be found on page 117, lines 8-13. http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/california_court_overturns_ban_on_gay_marriage_051408.pdf Now I would like to take this opportunity to point out the difference between copying and pasting the talking points of your side and researching. I'm not trying to belittle any one person, because both sides of every issue do this. But please, be critical of everything you read, unless it's "primary evidence" (as is the judge's ruling I have presented)
2. "It IS already happening and pastors are being sued, taken to jail, etc. for not complying" This is a flat out lie, another completely false talking point. Nowhere in our country has this happened. If you are concerned it might happen in the future please refer to the quote in the prior point
3. "What would you think if we were to remove laws that we do have against murder, stealing, rape, etc.?" The answer to this can be found in my original note, in the paragraph talking about freedom. "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." (Chief Justice Oliver Holmes). All these things are illegal because they harm someone else. Homosexuality is quite safe.
4. "voting NO is not just saying "I don't think we should force them to follow what God wants," but more so "I support/ am okay with that sin." Not true, Voting no is voting against forcing our beliefs upon an unbelieving world. Yes, the freedom in America is faltered, and we as Christians have the perfect freedom. But if we force our freedom upon others, it is by definition not freedom to them. We are called to be a light upon the hill, not a vindicating firestorm
5. "a civil union gives homosexual couples the same rights as a heterosexual marriage" It is actually called a Domestic Partnership, but regardless, civil union and domestic partnership are both not the same as marriage. They are different, they are separate. So this argument advocates "Separate but equal" which by definition "is inherently unequal" (Chief Justice Warren in Brown v. Board of Education) (Also, I can't help but note how this strengthens even further the parallel with Civil Rights)
6. "Teachers will be required to teach about homosexuality ideology at all ages and in all subjects." As Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley puts it, this claim is "false and misleading". Again, I will not make my case with anti-8 "facts". I have researched and found the actual law that this is referring to. And here it is http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/sen/sb_0051-0100/sb_71_bill_20031001_chaptered.html In it, it lays out the framework for sex education and nowhere does it say anything about teaching about same sex marriage to kindergarten students. Schools can choose when and if to teach about these things.
7. "...and parents will have NO say in it what so ever" Yet another flat out lie. This is referring to Massachusetts. We are California. In California parents have every right to know exactly what their children are being taught and to pull them out of anything they don't agree with. Evidence? It so happens to be in the same law as the last point
Thanks for the educated input. I'll just keep this simple: With all matters of God aside, I'm voting YES on Prop. 8 because 4 judges exercised an unlawful amount of power. If you'll recall, the general will of the people has been invalidated from preceeding elections, primarily with Prop. 22.
That's a fact any voter would know, whether politically inclined or not.
Post a Comment