I can I just say I'm proud that this happening? This feels like such a victory...

But in real response, I think this might swing the presidential election towards McCain, which I personally see nothing against. In fact, I think it might be the best thing that could possibly happen, because while McCain is against gay marriage, I don't think he'd overrule the decision -- or do anything to take it away; but instead just let it ride, and while probably demeaning it, he'd let it stay and respect the decision.

~Alisa @ We Are The Music

It's not gonna last, and even if it does, it'll be like Massachusetts, where it doesn't legally exist in other states. Let's face it, we've still got a long way to go before we actually have equal rights. It probably won't be for another ten or twenty years at least.

But at least it's something.
Call me when Indiana has equal rights (as if).

GOOD!!!!
damn assholes.
marriage is just a civil union. if you have a problem calling it "marriage" then don't call it that.
idiots.

keep it this way.

California, huh? Who saw that one coming?

We'll see how history views this one. I still think that the generation raised by homosexual couples will grow up to have major, deep-rooted psychological issues because of confused sexuality and gender roles, but I've been wrong before.

I was raised by straight parents and I have the same problem.

+1.

-- S

...point.

.Jtobler, you kind of sound really ignorant now. Sorry. Research something before you talk about it and offend a bunch of people who know more about the subject than you.

First ammendment. Research that.

Researched. Copying:

.Jtobler, you kind of sound really ignorant now. Sorry. Research something before you talk about it and offend a bunch of people who know more about the subject than you.

And if I don't feel like it?

& if I do not feel like researching the first amendment?

Idiot.

^^^ first amendment!! =)

.What I said was more of a suggestion drawn from annoyance than a command. You can do whatever the hell you want. It's your life. I just thought it was a reasonable expectation that someone know what they're talking about before they talk about it. Or you can sound foolish and embarrass yourself. You know... either way. Frankly, I'm embarrassed for you.

.Oh my God, you're sixteen. That's why.

Eighteen, and better read than you might imagine. I thought it safer to play it dumb so I don't get jumped for my oppinion, which is a completely legitimate concern in this society.

 

Honestly, I can't claim my stance as anything more than an oppinion, but I will asssert that it is an oppinion founded upon my own, personal experience. I have nothing against homosexuals (my best childhood friend is one). As far as rights go, I just feel that nobody is looking at the right of children these days. I firmly believe that every child has the right to be brought up in the home with a loving father and mother within wedlock. Obviously, we can't always guarentee that this will happen, however, I see this as an enourmous step backward. If that offends anyone, I'm sorry, but I will always fight for the rights of the rising generation, and anyone that has a problem with that can go lick a fish.

that particular arrangement hasn't been around for a very long time..
Yes, I agree that every child should have a mother/father..
However, that rarely exists anymore

Enough that it's still worth fighting for.

futile battle..
How many centuries of single-parent families..
Men carry on..
go off to war or work..
been this way for a long time, not gonna change

I realize this. That doesn't mean it's not worth fighting for, because every victory matters to someone. That's all I want. I don't need to change the world or even California. Just one child.

.So, basically you think every child should be born into a traditional AMERICAN family? Even so, that's a tradition that's been dying since at least WWII. Traditional marriages all over the world--even some in North America--have completely different ways of doing things. There are cultures in which the father has little to do with the child at all.
There are subcultures in America in which neither parent has hardly anything to do with the child. One culture, for many reasons, sees an ideal marriage as one woman married to several brothers. That's a fraternal polyandrous marriage. You're asking that every child have the American, nuclear, neolocal family and that's absurd. Obviously difference in how one is raised works--it has all over the world and throughout history. And to add "wedlock" to your big dream made me gag just a little. Who really determines when someone is married? Their love? The law? Their religion? Their culture? The term wedlock is dumb, basically, unless everyone in the world is an extremely conservative, orthodox Christian. And--newsflash--most aren't.

.And "oppinion" has one p.

I didn't say that. I know the facts. My stance stands.

.Actually you did say that, but whatever.

You read into it whatever you want, but the family is a basic unit of all societies. Just because some are regressing at different rates than others means very little. In deed, I would considder it a somewhat elitist idea that only traditional American families can be classified as I stated them. Perhaps it is you that needs to do their research on other cultures.

.To say other cultures are regressing is incredibly ethnocentric. This idea of one mother and one father and their children living in a new place together is relatively new in the history of the world.

.And reread that paragraph, because I'm pretty sure you contradicted yourself. Maybe somewhere around, "In deed, I would considder it a somewhat elitist idea that only traditional American families can be classified as I stated them." Unless you didn't know elitist meant--which is ok, because a lot of people don't--then you just contradicted yourself. Oh, and "indeed" is one word. And "consider" has one d.

.You're right. I do need to do my research on other cultures... I mean, since that's something I enjoy. I kind of study it.

All cultures are in a form of ethical regression. It's an inevitable decline that occurs between periods of massive social upheaval. And I guess that depends on which cultures of world history you study.

 

I'm quite sick of you correcting my spelling. I'll check it if I'm about to turn it in to my professor, but this is the internet. What I mean is that the nuclear family is not specific to America, as you seemed to imply.

.That's a religious thought, not a scientific one.

.All I have to say to your argument about the nuclear family is western-fucking-ization.

.I think you should give up. I'm honestly just annoyed now.

Perhaps not scientific, but not neccisarily specific to faith either. It just depends on which ethics you're looking at, and then you can find the statistics. Maybe I'm just cynical, but numbers don't lie.

 

Hardly, if you considder that the strongest family groups are found in the far east (and Latin America).

 

I suppose that's you're right, but don't expect to convince me against my beliefs just because they're not liberal enough for you.

Just thought I should let you know, that every time you pick on the kid's spelling, it taints your entire argument because it shows just how petty you are.

Why would I put down your argument? I agree with half of it! Which is why it annoys me when you point out the bad spelling. It just reminds me of when children argue, and add "Oh, by the way, you stink!" It reads in my mind as a similar thing.

Actually, from a literary standpoint, bad spelling ruins your argument so you are in fact wrong. The act of arguing in a very literary act.

It is also just part of the general argumentation process anyway. FYI.

And when you take arguments out of written form, put it into a verbal aspect, there is absolutely no need for that sort of reaction, is there? Which is why I believe it is petty. The way somebody spells has absolutely nothing to do with the point they are trying to make, unless the point is in fact about spelling by some coincidence. 

Yes well arguments are normally written before spoke. Especially in formal argumentation. 

Spoken.

Really? Because, the dictionary seems to disagree with you...

 

"Argument (n.)

1. An oral disagreement; verbal oppostition; contention; altercation

2. A discussion involving differing points of view; debate"

 

That's not the point though, that's just me being a smartarse.

 

I understand what you're saying, (and may I add, completely agree with your below comment regarding the instituation of marriage) I'm one of the first to notice somebody else's bad spelling, or bad grammar, but I find pointing it out during an argument petty. It's just my opinion. People are often offended when their shortcomings are pointed out, everybody knows this, and I feel that personal attacks against other's shortcomings are often made when one is running out of points to argue. I think that "mrficticious" made some very good arguments, and didn't need to resort to personal attacks.

 

Reading my comment back now, however, I did come across as quite indignant and rude, and I apologise for that, it wasn't my intention.  

If you can't even pay attention long enough to learn how to spell words they teach you in second grade, and don't bother to double check the way you're presenting yourself in a debate, how can you be expected to be taken seriously? I mean, what he's saying is..."I can't be bothered to learn how to spell or double check whether or not i'm being coherent, but i've made completely sure that all my opinions are backed up by research and statistics." Somehow I don't think so. The way you present yourself when in the midst of a discussion is half the battle. When you can't spell and don't read over your replies, it looks like you're talking out of your ass...which he is. 

I realise this, and I'm not disputing that the kid is talking crap. My point is, adding the personal insults to the end of what were quite interesting arguments from "mrficticious", took away from the seriousness of what he was saying.

 

Personally, along with shaking my head at what "jtobler" was arguing, I noticed the spelling mistakes, and the small grammatical errors. But, why bother bringing it up?

 

Hey, maybe I just felt sorry for him. I mean, having people proving your argument to be mostly incorrect and far fetched, PLUS having your bad English skills pointed out? That's got to be a rough day!!

Do you realize, child, that marriage is a social institution that doesn't necessarily have to exist? I mean honestly, forget about the homosexuals for a second and think about how ridiculous the family unit CAN BE. And in America no less. I imagine it would be better to have two adult roles in a child's life than just one. Some of the most amazing mothers I've met had their children out of wedlock and they turned out perfectly OK. I know some people born to gay parents and they're absolutely fascinating. So your bull shit about family-units is ridiculous. I mean honestly, what are you? Twelve? What kind of backwards thinking about you trying to administer here?

Hahaha.

.Virtual high five.

bingo!

Sorry to get in on this late, but...how about researching the 14th amendment?

.Did you mean to say this to me?

nah, more to the ignorant people who don't know what they're talking about in this discussion.

.Oh, ok... it just told me that I had a reply, so I was really confused.

.But yes, the 14th amendment. hurray.

haha no I agree with you, I was just late in the game and thus had to reply to your message.

Consequently, one of my best friends was raised by two lesbians, and she has not a problem in the world. She is confident in her sexuality (straight), and she is one of the most successful people I know! =)

same here

Or, maybe they'll grow up to not give a rat's ass, as they see firsthand that there is more to a person than if they love someone with matching genitals.

" I still think that the generation raised by homosexual couples will grow up to have major, deep-rooted psychological issues"
---like..those of hetros are not?
LOL

Yeah dude. I second that.

Personally, I think it's great. Equality for everyone and all that.