Public Opinion Rules Prop 8 Unconstitutional [INFOGRAPHIC]

Actually if Democrats had not wanted to prevent intr racial marriage, and made wure everyone paid their proper income taxes, in the first place, this would not be an issue.

They are the ones that insisted government get involved legally into what had been a religious activity

I think the people of California should decide.

They have, more than once, and it always comes out the same

I think their decision should stand.

That means they need to get rid of the activist judges

It is sad the state has been taken over by people like that.

So much for what the voters of California want. It's no wonder that some people think it's not worth the effort to vote when they see what they voted for overturned.
Real marriage is a man and a woman. This wass supposed to be about rights and the rights are there if you have a Civil Union or a Domestic Partnership, that should be enough.

Opposition to Prop 8 comes from young, single, LGBT voters.

The older (i.e. wiser), married (i.e. family-oriented) voters support the traditional definition of marriage.

It is a mistake to confuse age for wisdom. Our history is pockmarked by such error and yet each time we must learn again in retrospect. It could be argued that those who are married and support inequality are of the sickeningly popular "I got mine" school of thought.
I'm again surprised Fef. I've always respected your well reasoned and articulated perspectives even when I disagreed. I've come to expect a rational argument for your perspectives. I am disappointed that one is still not forthcoming. All you would have to do is logically justify your perspective, help me see your reasoning behind your perspective and I would be happy to consider and discuss. I am disappointed after 4 years that I do not rate that small courtesy.

I didn't make an argument.... I only reported the votes.

Generally, 13-24 year olds have less wisdom than older folk. Right?

I think that very debatable, but if one must make a polar generalization, that would be the direction to go.

And by default? older is wiser, does not equate to most reality. The concept of right and wrong is very real to the 13-24 year old category. They understand, for the most part, that if we are a country of equal rights and a country based upon principle of the separation of church and state, then to impose religious doctrine upon all citizens is a blatant violation of the US Constitution.

Generally, do you think 13 year olds have as much wisdom as you (in your 60s)?

Older is most certainly not inherently "wiser". And plenty of single people can be family oriented, but simply haven't found the right person to start that family with yet. Or are legally barred from starting that family simply because they're gay...

Generally, who has more wisdom: 13-17 year olds or 45+?

Also, do you consider Married people family-oriented?

What did I say otherwise?

Depends on what issue you're discussing. Clearly, on same sex marriage, it's the younger demographic that has more wisdom.

And no, being married doesn't inherently make one "family-oriented". Plenty of married people are out there having affairs, neglecting their children and spouses, etc.

I think you applied the exception to the rule in both examples because you want to satisfy your political agenda.

I don't think he did at all. I think the youth of our country have matured past the prejudices of our parents and grandparents, seeing that basic civil rights cannot be voted upon any more than Blacks vs Whites race differences are a valid concept to deny Black basic civil rights.

And I think you're trying to find a clever way to discount my valid points.

The first point I'm arguing is: "Older is most certainly not inherently 'wiser'", which I then supported with, "...on same sex marriage, it's the younger demographic that has more wisdom". Whether or not this highlights an "exception to the rule" is irrelevant. What IS relevant is who, in this instance, is displaying the greater wisdom. We can certainly debate the wisdom of support versus opposition of same sex marriage, but historically speaking, those on the side of equality and civil rights tend to be viewed as more wise.

The second point I'm arguing is: "plenty of single people can be family oriented", which I don't view as an exception to any rule whatsoever. I can only speak anecdotally on this, but of all the single people I've ever known, the vast majority have wanted/still want to find a wife/husband wiith whom they can have families. And with nearly 50% divorce rates among married people, it's hard to say that simply being married makes one more "family oriented".

And let's not lose sight of the fact that you outright ignored all exceptions to your supposed "rules" in a clear attempt to paint those who support YOUR political agenda as "wiser" and more "family oriented" while simultaneously belittling those do not. So pot and the kettle and all that...

Does the younger generation have more wisdom? Or just politically correct teachers and no concept of historical tradition or why government endorses religion?

Or lack thereof...

On same sex marriage, yes they do. Some level of discrimination is instinctual, allowing babies to recognize and respond to members of their own "tribe" so to speak, but it requires wisdom (not political correctness) to see beyond instinct and recognize that superficial differences do not warrant marginalizing people through legisation and Constitutional amendments.

As for history, it's same-sex marriage opponents that really need to do some studying. If they did, they might recognize that marriage has varied greatly in both form and function since the beginning of recorded history. They might also then recognize that same sex marriages contribute just as much to society as hetero marriage, and that includes the raising of children who become productive, contributing members of society.

Government shouldn't be endorsing any religion. They should simply be allowing religion to freely exist.

In reality, it is the application of knoweldge that determines wisdom. Today our youth are far more knowelegeable of current events and as a result do not carry around the baggage of prejudices like the older generation does.

As for family-oriented, take this one home and think on it, in states where same sex marriage is legal the divorce rate for homosexuals is 1/10th that of the heterosexual community. Seems there is much more to be said about the real commitment of homosexuals to "family oriented" values than there are for heterosexuals.

if you look into the history of marriage the traditional one would be one man many women along with it being a political stance to gain money and take over towns, clans, and governments

also being older does not equate to being wiser(possessed of or characterized by scholarly knowledge or learning) just a higher chance of being wiser, and then one does not need to be married to be family-oriented(person is devoted to his/her family and like to be with them)

Sorry but if find your stereotypes offensive. Older does not automaticly equate to wiser, as a matter of fact older far more than oftern equates to antiquatied ways of thought ingrained prejudices learned from childhood.

Married does not the majority of the time equate to "family-oriented" since the divorce rate shows an adverse observations of what "marriage" really is.

The Voters of California were hoodwinked into voting for Prop8 since the use of blatant lies and scare taticts were the most common of attacks against it in public. Behind the public banter the religious right forcefully ran a hate campaign based upon religious dogma, doctrines and beliefs which to my mind makes the religious groups anti-American in their ignoring of the basic principle of the separation of church and state.

so the older, wiser Circuit Court judges made better decision?

Issues of individual rights are legal issues- whether something is constitutional or not. If individual liberty were decided by popular opinion, we all would have very few rights in this nation.

correct... just like public opinion to disproportionately tax the wealthy to pay the entitlements of the rest unfairly violates the rights of the few.

Personally, I think that in the end everyone should pay the same percentage of their income in tax. Maybe do away with the loopholes so someone who looks like they are supposed to be paying 35% end up paying far less % in actuality then someone who makes much less. Do you think that it is fair that a company that makes profits in the 100's of billions pays almost nothing in tax to the federal government?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/0...

Careful, Fef. Some people are gonna call you some nasty names.

;) thanks for the warning. I know that sometimes people resort to name-calling when they have no arguments to offer.

Fortunately, enough smart people can disagree and remain civil.

Indeed

Whoever wrote this has no idea that anytime a small group of political gatherers do ANYTHING to change the status quo, then of course, it’s going to be POLITICAL. Redefining the word MARRIAGE is similar to changing the names of the Days of The Week. (Let’s for instance, start calling Thursday, Saturday, now.) I mean Politics are POLITICS. Why not? We could have 2-Saturdays; at least for a while . . . Who knows? . . . Perhaps it could become a Supreme Court issue . . . . ? ? ?

Well, as we all know, Thursday IS the new Friday...

Well, Sam, you might have a good point . . . I mean, after all, you can actually politicize a bowel-movement. (Obviously, NPI) . . . LOL

Ha! Ha! Thanks, Lerro, for cleaning that up . . . With your NPI; I mean . . . LOL

In a few generations I honestly believe equality will become the status quo. Although I'm sure some conservatives will blame liberal education on why the youth are pro-gay marriage.

The truth is to the youth it isn't about the "sanctity of marriage". Which is violated by perpetual divorce, but it's about rights and freedoms of minorities. Liberal-minded people tend to stand for the "little man", I argue they do it way too much that it creates class warfare.

Anyways as a Libertarian minded person, I am pleased with the results of this poll.

So as a libertarian do you support gay marriage?

yes, I support equal rights for everyone, but I don't support forcing people to support equal right. But if they infringe upon other people's liberty than I think they should be punished.

Well what a lot of people don't get when it comes to gay marriage is churches cannot be forced to marry a gay couple just because it's legal. A churchs faith on marriage is protected by the first amendment freedom of religion. :) and I thank you for your support.