Prop8 Judge Admits Hes Gay - Page 4 - GoFuckYourself.com

brassmonkey · 08-06-2010, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

If you read the thread you will see that I do concede there is a precedent with Jim Crow laws, but I would argue that those laws were ill conceived and poorly written in the first place. Also you are under the assumption that homosexuals must be born gay just as blacks are born with darkly pigmented skin and based on that you draw the comparison? Really you cannot compare the two issues unless you base it on the fact that homosexuals are born gay, and frankly you cannot prove that and the burden of proof if you use that argument is on you.

this isnt about how gays became gay. it's about the citizens of cali saying we are not bending because you want it that way.

mardigras · 08-06-2010, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

If you read the thread you will see that I do concede there is a precedent with Jim Crow laws, but I would argue that those laws were ill conceived and poorly written in the first place. Also you are under the assumption that homosexuals must be born gay just as blacks are born with darkly pigmented skin and based on that you draw the comparison? Really you cannot compare the two issues unless you base it on the fact that homosexuals are born gay, and frankly you cannot prove that and the burden of proof if you use that argument is on you.

What difference does it matter if gays are born or made? The issue is rights and equal treatment under laws.

dyna mo · 08-06-2010, 03:02 PM

Grapesoda · 08-06-2010, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

There is a magnitude of ruling we are talking about here, dont act coy and act like this isnt the single most important law that homosexuals have ever felt needed to pass. Also your argument about who labeled him what is irrelevant. The guy IS sympathetic to homosexuals, he wouldnt be one if he wasnt.

Also lets not forget THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS IN CALIFORNIA BANNED SAME SEX MARRIAGE, he is in the minority opinion and has no right to be judging this case.

forcing straight porn to wear condom is a pretty important ruling the homo's are pushing, probably going to do one hell of a lot more to affect you life than a couple of cocksuckers getting married

PenisFace · 08-06-2010, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

Why stop at homosexual marriages? Extend it to polygamy, child marriages and beast marriages. Hell necro-marriage too.

If you can't see the massive difference between a guy marrying a guy, and a guy having 10 wives, or a woman wanting to marry her dog... Well I just don't know.

brassmonkey · 08-06-2010, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

What difference does it matter if gays are born or made? The issue is rights and equal treatment under laws.

oh snap!

2012 · 08-06-2010, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

oh snap!

two snaps up and a tweeist

dyna mo · 08-06-2010, 03:20 PM

are there any actual homos in this thread weighing in or just homophobes/homo sympathizing master debaters?

mardigras · 08-06-2010, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

oh snap!

I'm Blaine Edwards... And I'm Antionne Merriweather... And welcome to "Men on Prop 8"!

mardigras · 08-06-2010, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

are there any actual homos in this thread weighing in or just homophobes/homo sympathizing master debaters?

I am an actual card carrying "Friend of Dorothy" ;)

brassmonkey · 08-06-2010, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

I'm Blake Edwards... And I'm Antionne Merriweather... And welcome to "Men on Prop 8"!

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Hated it!!!!

mardigras · 08-06-2010, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Hated it!!!!

Today's show is brought to you by Lays... bet you can't eat just one.

And who'd want to?

dyna mo · 08-06-2010, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

I am an actual card carrying "Friend of Dorothy" ;)

i haven't heard that one in a while!

_Richard_ · 08-06-2010, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

this is going to get heated fast.

"conflict of interest"

definitely. it is a grave insult to even bring that up, and considering how this man has handled himself, history etc, this is going to be extremely embarrassing

brassmonkey · 08-06-2010, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

Today's show is brought to you by Lays... bet you can't eat just one.

And who'd want to?

eat? more like gobble

let me adjust my wig

that little hat he wore in that skit still brings me to tears.

brassmonkey · 08-06-2010, 05:28 PM

sexy!

cambaby · 08-06-2010, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

What difference does it matter if gays are born or made? The issue is rights and equal treatment under laws.

Rights based on preference are not a given, sorry.

_Richard_ · 08-06-2010, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

Rights based on preference are not a given, sorry.

not to go all patriotic, but you happen to have any family die in the great wars?

Ethersync · 08-06-2010, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcop

I always wondered why polygamy is against the law. Anyone know why?

Religious bullshit. It should be legal. So should gay marriage. That any of this is up for debate is absurd.

cambaby · 08-06-2010, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

not to go all patriotic, but you happen to have any family die in the great wars?

Yes I have, but how is that even relevant?

cambaby · 08-06-2010, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PenisFace

If you can't see the massive difference between a guy marrying a guy, and a guy having 10 wives, or a woman wanting to marry her dog... Well I just don't know.

Is it the same massive difference between a man marrying a woman or a man marrying another man? Are you saying polygamy is vastly different? Its just as natural as homosexuality in the animal world.

The Demon · 08-06-2010, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

Is it the same massive difference between a man marrying a woman or a man marrying another man? Are you saying polygamy is vastly different? Its just as natural as homosexuality in the animal world.

So let me get this straight. Same sex marriage proponents want no distinction made between straight and heterosexual couples. But these same people want a distinction between straight/heterosexual and polygamy? Self pwnage and hypocrisy for the win! Then they have the balls to say "Who are you to ...."

GatorB · 08-06-2010, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

YA DUN GOOFED
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...p_8_sames.html

So a homosexual federal judge overturns the will of the majority of Californian voters and no one sees the obvious conflict of interest here?

So he should rule the OPPOSITE way? So if this was 50 years ago and this was about interracial marriage( which WAS in fact illegal in many states ) and the judge was black he should recuse himself?

GatorB · 08-06-2010, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

So let me get this straight. Same sex marriage proponents want no distinction made between straight and heterosexual couples. But these same people want a distinction between straight/heterosexual and polygamy? Self pwnage and hypocrisy for the win! Then they have the balls to say "Who are you to ...."

Figures a retard like you doesn't get it. WTF are you positng here again for anyways? You seriously need a fucking brain check.

mgtarheels · 08-06-2010, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

So let me get this straight. Same sex marriage proponents want no distinction made between straight and heterosexual couples. But these same people want a distinction between straight/heterosexual and polygamy? Self pwnage and hypocrisy for the win! Then they have the balls to say "Who are you to ...."

Wow, facepalm.

_Richard_ · 08-06-2010, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

Yes I have, but how is that even relevant?

it's relevant because those men believed they were fighting for freedom

you are directly impeding in they're legacy and pissing all over the honour that those people died for every time you point at a minority and tell them they can't have something, or be something, simply for who they are.

we can cut hairs all we want but in the end, what right do we have, as a group of a certain sexuality, to tell another group of a certain sexuality on a LEGAL and GOVERNMENTAL level that they can't ordain their marriages in the eyes of God.

if you're able to get the old fuck down here and straighten a few things out, so be it, but until that day happens, we should leave the religious mumbo jumbo to the people who care to do those things and stay out of other peoples business

or one day, it will be your business that's being gone through, and no one left to defend you

The Demon · 08-06-2010, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

Figures a retard like you doesn't get it. WTF are you positng here again for anyways? You seriously need a fucking brain check.

Well, when you have an incompetent inbred like GatorB claiming someone else is stupid, you know your day is made.

The Demon · 08-06-2010, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

it's relevant because those men believed they were fighting for freedom

you are directly impeding in they're legacy and pissing all over the honour that those people died for every time you point at a minority and tell them they can't have something, or be something, simply for who they are.

Really? So you're saying the men of WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc would have agreed with same sex marriage? If so, you know that's 100% wrong and I can guarantee you what they thought about "marriage".

Quote:

we can cut hairs all we want but in the end, what right do we have, as a group of a certain sexuality, to tell another group of a certain sexuality on a LEGAL and GOVERNMENTAL level that they can't ordain their marriages in the eyes of God.

By your logic, what right does anyone have to tell any other person or group anything? This is the central theme of modern liberalism. Relativism has been debunked time and time again.

Quote:

if you're able to get the old fuck down here and straighten a few things out, so be it, but until that day happens, we should leave the religious mumbo jumbo to the people who care to do those things and stay out of other peoples business

or one day, it will be your business that's being gone through, and no one left to defend you

Pretty sure you're jumping to an extreme, which is all that's left for you to do to prove your point.

mardigras · 08-06-2010, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

So he should rule the OPPOSITE way? So if this was 50 years ago and this was about interracial marriage( which WAS in fact illegal in many states ) and the judge was black he should recuse himself?

cambaby has already explained that since blacks don't choose to be black but gays choose to be gay there should be some difference in allowing and denying rights...

The Demon · 08-06-2010, 07:19 PM

Only a complete buffoon would compare the oppression of an entire race with banning same sex marriages.

tony286 · 08-06-2010, 07:20 PM

the reason fed judges are basically in for life.Is so they can make the hard choices and not swayed by mob rule. I find it funny when what we do is protected by the federal law. If it was up to the states we as an industry would be fucked.

Ethersync · 08-06-2010, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

cambaby has already explained that since blacks don't choose to be black but gays choose to be gay there should be some difference in allowing and denying rights...

Sounds to me like cambaby is choosing to stay in the closet...

_Richard_ · 08-06-2010, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

Really? So you're saying the men of WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc would have agreed with same sex marriage? If so, you know that's 100% wrong and I can guarantee you what they thought about "marriage".

By your logic, what right does anyone have to tell any other person or group anything? This is the central theme of modern liberalism. Relativism has been debunked time and time again.

Pretty sure you're jumping to an extreme, which is all that's left for you to do to prove your point.

am i saying for the time? no. but i don't think they asked who's freedom they'd be protecting, and i don't think they died thinking that it should even matter.

furthermore, what i do know is as their children, they expected, if not demanded, that we be more than who they are, be better than who they inspired to be, and uphold the generational agreement that has been in place since the dawn of time

your logic is flawed on the basic assumption that all liberalism is universally unreasonable, using the very same liberalism that gave you the freedom and education to do so

use it.

Blackamooka · 08-06-2010, 07:36 PM

Comparing things like the the civil rights movement and women's sufferage to the debate over gay marriage is a logical fallacy. It can be proven without a doubt that a person is born a woman or born black, white, latino etc. Until it is proven conclusively that being gay is not a choice, this is an argument over privileges; not rights.

_Richard_ · 08-06-2010, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackamooka

Comparing things like the the civil rights movement and women's sufferage to the debate over gay marriage is a logical fallacy. It can be proven without a doubt that a person is born a woman or born black, white, latino etc. Until it is proven conclusively that being gay is not a choice, this is an argument over privileges, not rights.

what's next after homosexuals? red headed people?

Ethersync · 08-06-2010, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackamooka

Comparing things like the the civil rights movement and women's sufferage to the debate over gay marriage is a logical fallacy. It can be proven without a doubt that a person is born a woman or born black, white, latino etc. Until it is proven conclusively that being gay is not a choice, this is an argument over privileges; not rights.

Prove to me that being heterosexual is not a choice.

The Demon · 08-06-2010, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

am i saying for the time? no. but i don't think they asked who's freedom they'd be protecting, and i don't think they died thinking that it should even matter.

I'm just stating a prime example that would partly refute your point of view. I can say with absolute certainty that soldiers and things like same sex marriage rights, do not mix well. But I understand your point.

Quote:

your logic is flawed on the basic assumption that all liberalism is universally unreasonable, using the very same liberalism that gave you the freedom and education to do so

use it.

Weird, here was my explicit statement about the liberalism I'm talking about.

Quote:

By your logic, what right does anyone have to tell any other person or group anything? This is the central theme of modern liberalism. Relativism has been debunked time and time again.

Modern Liberalism=/=Classical Liberalism.

Classical Liberalism bears the most resemblance to modern conservatism.

tiger · 08-06-2010, 08:23 PM

Playing devils advocate you could make the exact same argument from the other side if he was straight.

cambaby · 08-06-2010, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiger

Playing devils advocate you could make the exact same argument from the other side if he was straight.

Absolutely, and thats why I said right at the start of my post "YA DUN GOOFED". Him being a homosexual HURTS Prop8 opponents more than it helps them all it does is give them a fast track to the Supreme Court to get beat down.

jackknoff · 08-06-2010, 09:08 PM

I can't believe this is the 21st century and there are still so many bigots out there...

Jack

directfiesta · 08-06-2010, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Been married twice, by a juctice of the peace , once in a church, once in my families property.
Both times the justice read from a bible

brassmonkey · 08-06-2010, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackknoff

I can't believe this is the 21st century and there are still so many bigots out there...

Jack

this has nothing to do with race.

epitome · 08-06-2010, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

Oh jesus, you're delusional. Even homosexuals admit they're not normal. The ones that are trying to rationalize their choices came up with "there's nothing wrong with it!!" You're right though, your retarded opinion trumps science!

You're right though. Most stupid people are in denial and therefore find everyone else to be abnormal.

The only people who think being gay is a choice are straight people. I have never met a gay person that has said they made a choice somewhere in life.

What happened is homophobic straight people tried to win things by insisting it is a choice when they'd have no idea.

So if it's a choice are you saying that you have homoerotic thoughts but choose to sleep with women? If you insist that it is a choice then you must admit that we all lust after each sex. Anything different would mean it is not a choice.

I do not lust after women because I was born gay. I first realized it when I was about five and did not really understand it. I finally admitted it to myself at around 18 and acted at 20. I never "experimented" with a girl because I had no desire, as homosexuality naturally occurs in me.

cambaby · 08-06-2010, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome

I do not lust after women because I was born gay. I first realized it when I was about five and did not really understand it. I finally admitted it to myself at around 18 and acted at 20. I never "experimented" with a girl because I had no desire, as homosexuality naturally occurs in me.

Lol you "realized" you were born gay at 5 years old.... yeah ok buddy.

Yeah I bet homosexuality occurs IN you.

Look there is no such thing as a "gay" gene its a behavioural deviancy period.

_Richard_ · 08-06-2010, 11:03 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_scale

cambaby · 08-06-2010, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_scale

Lol what the fuck does that shit have to do with ANYTHING in this thread? Oh wait are you trying to say you are "kinda gay" but not all the way?

Tickler · 08-06-2010, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

Rights based on preference are not a given, sorry.

But the LGBT have already earned those rights by going through the courts. You want to take them away, you will have to come up with better arguments for the courts to change that.

And since they are designated as a minority, you can't make laws that discriminate against them, even if you are in the majority.

Want to change the constitution go right ahead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

Absolutely, and thats why I said right at the start of my post "YA DUN GOOFED". Him being a homosexual HURTS Prop8 opponents more than it helps them all it does is give them a fast track to the Supreme Court to get beat down.

This judges rulings look pretty straight forward according to the information he cited. If the homphobes want to challenge the actual decision, they can appeal it up the judicial ladder.

If they want to call bias on the judge because he happens to be gay, that's a whole new pile of shit.

A couple of months back I got into a discussion with Tom Hymes about the judge dropping out of the case because there was porn on his computer. If a judge can be removed for his personal likes/dislikes the court system will crash.

An example I mentioned at the time was if the Prop8 people would try to go after this gay judge if they lost.

Can a white judge be biased against a black defendant
Can a white judge be biased against a white defendant
Can a black judge be biased against a black defendant
Can a black judge be biased against a white defendant
Can a female judge be biased against a male defendant
Can a female judge be biased against a female defendant

I was mainly discussing this thought though
Can a judge that likes porn be biased against a porn defendant
Can a judge that dislikes porn be biased against a porn defendant

Going by that logic that a judge might be biased means you would never be able to actually proceed with ANY court case.

Tom called me a subversive, but he tended to agree

cambaby · 08-06-2010, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tickler

But the LGBT have already earned those rights by going through the courts. You want to take them away, you will have to come up with better arguments for the courts to change that.

The issue was already voted on and banned in the State of California by the majority of voters. The burden to CHANGE things is on YOU not them.

baddog · 08-06-2010, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcop

I always wondered why polygamy is against the law. Anyone know why?

To protect people from themselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

i like packed fudge it's on sale at walgreens.

I doubt you are going to find quality fudge (candy or otherwise) at a Walgreens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

I am an actual card carrying "Friend of Dorothy" ;)

Tickler · 08-06-2010, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

The issue was already voted on and banned in the State of California by the majority of voters. The burden to CHANGE things is on YOU not them.

You skipped the part about having to go through the courts, or change the constitution to remove their rights.

Quote:

And since they are designated as a minority, you can't make laws that discriminate against them, even if you are in the majority.

Just because your majority of 51% voted that way, doesn't make it so.

08-06-2010, 05:28 PM	#166
brassmonkey Pay It Forward Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Yo Mama House Posts: 77,042	sexy! __________________ TRUMP 2025 KEKAW!!! - The Laken Riley Act Is Law! DACA ENDED - SUPPORT AZ HCR 2060 52R - email: brassballz-at-techie.com

08-06-2010, 07:19 PM	#180
The Demon Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 7,336	Only a complete buffoon would compare the oppression of an entire race with banning same sex marriages. __________________ Greed is Good

08-06-2010, 07:36 PM	#184
Blackamooka Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: In Your Mind Posts: 495	Comparing things like the the civil rights movement and women's sufferage to the debate over gay marriage is a logical fallacy. It can be proven without a doubt that a person is born a woman or born black, white, latino etc. Until it is proven conclusively that being gay is not a choice, this is an argument over privileges; not rights. __________________ The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by infinity is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity. - Voltaire

08-06-2010, 08:23 PM	#188
tiger Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,986	Playing devils advocate you could make the exact same argument from the other side if he was straight. __________________

08-06-2010, 03:02 PM	#153
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,124

08-06-2010, 03:20 PM	#158
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,124	are there any actual homos in this thread weighing in or just homophobes/homo sympathizing master debaters?

08-06-2010, 07:20 PM	#181
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	the reason fed judges are basically in for life.Is so they can make the hard choices and not swayed by mob rule. I find it funny when what we do is protected by the federal law. If it was up to the states we as an industry would be fucked.

08-06-2010, 09:08 PM	#190
jackknoff Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 545	I can't believe this is the 21st century and there are still so many bigots out there... Jack

08-06-2010, 11:03 PM	#195
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Vancouver Posts: 30,985	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_scale