TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- USA - West Coast / Las Vegas
-- The NO on Prop 8 thread....
Pages (20): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 »


Posted by zerotonin79 on Nov-05-2008 06:35:

quote:
Originally posted by R!CH
if 8 passes, it will be the first time californians vote to explicitly take away the rights of a group of people that already exist. rights that have proven to cause no harm on individuals or society as a whole. it will be a blemish on what is otherwise an amazing election.


considering we just voted a black man into the white house, there is a first time for everything...


Posted by R!CH on Nov-05-2008 06:36:

quote:
Originally posted by zerotonin79
half of Frisco has reported...


san francisco has a population of 750,000. the bay area has a population of 7.6 million.


Posted by zerotonin79 on Nov-05-2008 06:37:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveT
This prop prob won't matter in the end because it's expected to go right back to the supreme court.



yeah, trump the rights of the people to the courts.


i disapprove of this prop just like the next person but this is DEMOCRACY.


Posted by R!CH on Nov-05-2008 06:42:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveT
This prop prob won't matter in the end because it's expected to go right back to the supreme court.


well the state supreme court can't do anything because 8 is an amendment to the state constitution and the ca high court is obligated to enforce that document. the united states constitution however trumps the state constitution and this could possibly play out in the u.s. supreme court assuming there is a case that state rights don't allow for discrimination.


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 06:45:

quote:
Originally posted by R!CH
san francisco has a population of 750,000. the bay area has a population of 7.6 million.


80% of SFers are voting no....

Santa Clara County is 55% no. If a county like that was 80% NO, too, would help the gap quite a bit.


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 06:53:

First numbers: SF
Second numbers: state-wide

Proposition 8-Same Sex Marriage Ban
Choice Votes %
Yes 53,419 23.5%
No 174,225 76.5%
98% of precincts reporting
Updated 11/04 10:55PM

All Precincts Totals
Choice Votes %
Yes 2,343,734 52.5%
No 2,118,718 47.5%
34% of precincts reporting
Updated 11/04 10:55PM


Posted by R!CH on Nov-05-2008 06:55:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveT
80% of SFers are voting no....

Santa Clara County is 55% no. If a county like that was 80% NO, too, would help the gap quite a bit.


well if it passes it will be a blow to california's legacy of progressive leadership in this country, but i'm glad 1a, 2, 11 and 12 are winning and 4, 5, 6, 7 is losing. hopefully measure b passes too even though i can't find any data on the local measures.


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 06:58:

quote:
Originally posted by R!CH
well if it passes it will be a blow to california's legacy of progressive leadership in this country, but i'm glad 1a, 2, 11 and 12 are winning and 4, 5, 6, 7 is losing. hopefully measure b passes too even though i can't find any data on the local measures.


Talk about close!!

MEASURE B
366 out of 580 precincts (63.10 %)

Votes Percent
Yes 75,210 49.80 %
No 75,819 50.20 %


Posted by MR STROKE on Nov-05-2008 07:05:

quote:
Originally posted by R!CH
. rights that have proven to cause no harm on individuals or society as a whole.


but... but... they will teach my child its ok for a prince to marry a prince


over 80 million dollars has been spent on this prop!(the most ever) un fucking real. The religious right couldn't haven't have spent that money somewhere else? schools are fucked and they are worring about 2 people getting married
what a fucking waste.


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:05:

Too bad Measure R is losing, lol.

Measure R: Rename the Oceanside Wastewater Treatment Facility to the "George W. Bush Sewage Plant"

Choice Votes %
Yes 62,818 30.8%
No 140,891 69.2%


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:05:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveT
Talk about close!!

MEASURE B
366 out of 580 precincts (63.10 %)

Votes Percent
Yes 75,210 49.80 %
No 75,819 50.20 %


Updated:

MEASURE B
571 out of 580 precincts (98.45 %)

Votes Percent
Yes 104,391 49.44 %
No 106,752 50.56


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:09:

quote:
Originally posted by MR STROKE
but... but... they will teach my child its ok for a prince to marry a prince


*living in the old days*

but...but...they will teach my child it's ok for people of different races to get along...to love each other.


Posted by R!CH on Nov-05-2008 07:13:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveT
Updated:

MEASURE B
571 out of 580 precincts (98.45 %)

Votes Percent
Yes 104,391 49.44 %
No 106,752 50.56


where are you getting this from? santa clara county website reports

Completed Precincts 433 of 1,142
Yes 65.75% 213,266
No 334.25% 111,085

sfgate update to prop 8:

Yes 2,516,203 52.8%
No 2,251,742 47.2%
37% of precincts reporting
Updated 11/04 11:10PM


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:17:

quote:
Originally posted by R!CH
where are you getting this from? santa clara county website reports

Completed Precincts 433 of 1,142
Yes 65.75% 213,266
No 334.25% 111,085

sfgate update to prop 8:

Yes 2,516,203 52.8%
No 2,251,742 47.2%
37% of precincts reporting
Updated 11/04 11:10PM


Got the measure B results from SF's website.


Posted by R!CH on Nov-05-2008 07:19:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveT
Got the measure B results from SF's website.


we're talking about different measures...

santa clara county's measure b sends bart to san jose and connects it with caltrain making the entire bay area connected by a continuous light rail loop that saves 12,000 gallons of gas/day and removes 50,000 cars/day from the road.

sf county measure b is something about health and pension benefits.


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:27:

I thought it was the health one, but was confused a little because the article kept saying it was voted on in June 2008....hrmmm

But then I read some article talking about San Francisco measures and talked a bit about Prop K (prostitution) and talked abotu Measure B and said it was for the BART extension, too.

I was wondering WTF that had to do with SF, since 1) it's not gonna touch this area and 2) BART is operated out of Oakland as it is.

Anyhow, it all makes sense now. lol


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:34:

11:30 Prop 8 Update

All Precincts Totals
Choice Votes %
Yes 2,935,580 52.5%
No 2,653,017 47.5%
47% of precincts reporting
Updated 11/04 11:30PM


Posted by DJ Reese on Nov-05-2008 07:35:

I want to chime back in on this...but I'm going to wait until the vote is final. And if 8 gets passed...then I'll erupt. Although it will still have to go back to the Cali Supreme Court that shot it down once already. This is just the beginning of a long war on this even though it WAS ALREADY WON before prop 8. But I guess the first time through the courts here was just a won battle. It won't end until it gets to the national Supreme Court...but like I said...I'll get into that later.


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:48:

Oh yeah, don't forget Measure B needs 2/3rds vote to pass...so it's failing right now.


Posted by DaveT on Nov-05-2008 07:49:

Los Angeles #s for Prop 8.

44% Reporting

MEASURE Votes Percent
8 - SAME-SEX INITIATIVE - YES 631,501 53.41
NO 550,947 46.59


Posted by selfEvolution on Nov-05-2008 08:30:

If "Yes" does pass ?

#1. I have heard from some people that for Prop 8 to pass, it needs only an "over 50 percent majority".

#2. Some others have stated 2/3rds.

#3. In either case, even if it does pass, it still can go back to the Supreme Court and overturned?.....or.......

#4. Since Prop 8 is about a Constitutional Amendment (?) - It would have to pass 2/3rd of the majority of the State Congress ?


What is true or false of the above? I get all kinds of conflicting answers on the internet.


Posted by selfEvolution on Nov-05-2008 08:35:

A Post of Mine from May 2008 on Proposistion 8

Eleven Points I made back in May, 2008 in response to a "Christian's" blog who proudly boasts of proclaiming "Athiest Bashing Week" while railing against NONheterosexuals the world over - Dinesh D'Souza

http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/20...s-vs-democracy/

1.) Most "Christians" I've met can't even recite half of the Ten Commandments, none of which mentions homosexuality, but one of which states that we should "NOT work on the Sabbath". If we're going to deny two consenting adults the equal right to marry based on an ancient book of fairy tales, then we may as well deny rights for the millions of people who "WORK on the Sabbath" - and the ones who employee them (by buying from them).

2.) The bible mentions "gluttony" far more as an "abomination" than it does homosexuality. How many gluttonous Christians do we know? I know plenty, including Jerry Falwell, who's gluttony led to his heart attack, to name just one of many "Christians" who died of obesity. Isn't the body God's temple to these "Christians"?

3.) God, who allegedly is the "all-knowing all-creator", by definition created different sexual orientations, as they are found in millions of people in all cultures throughout history. There are even intersexed people found in all cultures - people BORN with BOTH male and female organs - who do the lying Christians suggest THEY have the right marry?

4.) Marriage is not just for "pro-creation". There are millions of Christian couples who either cannot or will not have children in an already growing and overpopulated world with food and clean water shortages amounting to 1.5 million deaths of children each year. There are millions of more "Christians" known as nuns and priests who will also not have children.

5.) Alexander The Great was bisexual, but mostly gay, and many famous Army Generals consider him to be the greatest General of all times. The Greek culture prospered for centuries until the Christianity was adopted by the Romans and then we saw the ushering in of the dark ages, the inquisition, witch huntings, and anyone not Christian, gay or biologically different in any way were burned at the stake or tortured and killed "in the name of god".

6.) In a democracy that respects equality, the national and State Constitutions are designed to protect minorities such as NONheterosexuals from the ignorance and emotional prejudices of the majority. When the majority tries to ram their religious beliefs down the throats of the world to support their pet prejudices, the Supreme Court has to listen to rational debate. The Supreme Court those not only protects minority religions, but minority sexual orientations.

7.) The California Supreme Court heard hours of rational argument and evidence. They listened to both sides, both pro-gay marriage and anti gay marriage. The anti gay-marriage people were asked over and over to give a compelling argument that would show that gay marriage somehow injures anyone or injures marriage as we know it. They could not come up with a compelling argument, and many of them were given the opportunity to do so. All we heard was their prejudices and their unfounded homophobia.

8.) Thomas Jefferson, the principle advocate behind the Bill of Rights of the Constitution, stated: "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others." Gay marriage between two consenting adults was not proven to be any more harmful or injurious to any other person than heterosexual marriage.

9.) *One* of the causes of divorce is cheating, often listed as irreconcilable difference, according to a divorce attorney I know, "to save the couple from public embarrassment". With nearly a 50% divorce rate among "Christians" surely "faith" in their invisible god is not *always* stronger than the immediate need for gratification and/or health considerations.

10.) The cheating and divorces continue decade after decade, no matter how many prayers have been uttered by preachers and priests, family and friends, to keep the blessed couples together.
Studies done by Christian organizations found that the divorce rate is actually higher among Christian Fundamentalist than it is among atheist, and divorce rates are higher in the MidSouth, where NONheterosexuals are relatively closeted than divorce rates in larger where NONheterosexuality is more accepted. I'm not drawing a correlation here, but it does support the fact that HONheterosexual marriage would certainly not harm heterosexual marriage.

11.) Self-proclaimed "Christians" such as Bill O'Reilly used misleading and irrational fear-mongering by stating gay marriage will lead to polygamy and "people marrying animals." It hasn't in five countries where it's legal, nor in Massachusetts. Imagine that, using feat-bating instead of facts to limit freedom and equality - Bill O'Reilly's hypocrisy is too often the rule rather than the exception when it comes to gay bashing on religious grounds. O'Reilly was also among those Christians "baring false witness" that if we allow South Vietnam to fall to the communist, the rest of Asia would also. One act does not necessarily have to follow another, unrelated act, and in fact, often does not.


Posted by DJ Reese on Nov-05-2008 08:38:

If you wat to keep track of the prop 8 vote...here is the link. Just refresh your page from time to time. It has been between a 300,000 to 200,000 difference for a while.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/re...allot.measures/


Posted by R!CH on Nov-05-2008 08:51:

Re: If "Yes" does pass ?

quote:
Originally posted by selfEvolution
#1. I have heard from some people that for Prop 8 to pass, it needs only an "over 50 percent majority".

#2. Some others have stated 2/3rds.

#3. In either case, even if it does pass, it still can go back to the Supreme Court and overturned?.....or.......

#4. Since Prop 8 is about a Constitutional Amendment (?) - It would have to pass 2/3rd of the majority of the State Congress ?


What is true or false of the above? I get all kinds of conflicting answers on the internet.


#1 is correct. #4 applies to the united states constitution.


Posted by R!CH on Nov-05-2008 08:58:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveT
Oh yeah, don't forget Measure B needs 2/3rds vote to pass...so it's failing right now.


it only requires a simple majority to become law.


Pages (20): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.