Arnold Orders AG to Stop Gay Marriages

[Bill in SD, CA]

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has ordered the state's attorney general to take legal action to put an end to San Francisco's granting of marriage licenses to gay couples.

The "Terminator" strikes again.

Arnold Orders AG to Stop Gay Marriages

Bill

[super gerbil]

thats great.

Thank god that this will end.

[brandon184]

thats great.

Thank god that this will end.

God knows I feel the same way... It was having such an intense and dramatic, not to mention negative affect on my own, daily life. I could barely stand it anymore.

[Mr. Goodbytes]

Brandon, I'm curious, you were pretty silent when Judge Roy Moore was violating the law when he left the Ten Commandments monument up when told to remove it. What did you feel of his violation of a judge's interpretation of the law, which is considered the law? Moore violated the law, and his violation didn't adversly affect anyone but himself. Based on what i'm getting from your comments is that if we apply your logic to the Roy Moore situation, then he would still be on the bench. Should we all just be able to break whatever pesky laws we don't like?

[brandon184]

Brandon, I'm curious, you were pretty silent when Judge Roy Moore was violating the law when he left the Ten Commandments monument up when told to remove it.

I was? Hmm... Puzzling. I must have been busy eating carrot cake during that debate.

It really has little to nothing to do with who's breaking what laws. My response was in regard to the radical amount of elation that was shown to Governor Schwarzenegger ordering the CA AG to stop the marriages. And I'd guess that anyone who has such a staunch anti-gay-marriage stance isn't in the position they're in because it happens to be "against the law".

I don't recall stating that the law being broken in this specific case was "okay"... In fact, my opinion is that it isn't the greatest idea to be breaking the law in order to make gay marriage work.

I wonder whether there was a larger "radical amount of elation" over the initial decision to allow gay marriage in SF, or over the order to stop it?

I don't think this issue should be trivialized. Much like the abortion issue, gay marriage is not so much about how it affects the individual lives of people NOT directly involved, rather it's an important indicator of social and moral values. The real question is whether or not the Government should sanction activity that has traditionally been considered aborant and immoral.

[Knothead]

Originally posted by Fingers

I don't think this issue should be trivialized. Much like the abortion issue, gay marriage is not so much about how it affects the individual lives of people NOT directly involved, rather it's an important indicator of social and moral values. The real question is whether or not the Government should sanction activity that has traditionally been considered aborant and immoral.

Huh! I hadn't thought about it that way. Very interesting!

However, I would then argue that consideration of the individual lives of people who ARE directly involved should take precedence over however we might wish to portray ourselves as a society.

In other words, these people (gays) are REAL, and the "ideal" neccessarily becomes an abstract notion in the face of persecuting human beings...but then again, this is coming from a guy who cannot understand why anybody gets worked up over the idea of homosexuals in the first place.

I guess I'm just a "live and let live" (not to mention, "Judge not, lest ye be judged") kinda guy.

[J-Excel]

Knot,

I'm all for personal liberty to an extent. The problem is when the liberty of the individuals becomes more important than the values of the society, society breaks down. There has to be a balance. Each individual in society places these issues on the scale of immorality. The issues where there is an overwhelming opinion of immorality are forbidden in society. Some issues fall in a gray area on average, with some people heavily for and some people heavily against, so there is a great deal of debate. Gay marriage happens to be one of them. If we say "screw the will of society, let the individuals have their way" we will end up as just another dead civilization.

[Gomer]

Goodbytes:

Moore violated the law, and his violation didn't adversly affect anyone but himself.

His violation of the law affected everyone who used that building.

well said knot!

[Chuckiechan]

I can't believe the Democrats aren't taking a position on this. It's part of their base and they have a lot of money: TINKS.

Two Incomes, No Kids.