Article View: sac.general
Article #202Re: Vote NO on Prop Eight
From: kujebak
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:51
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:51
48 lines
3752 bytes
3752 bytes
On Nov 3, 8:03 pm, nob...@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) wrote: > LeRoy Blue <leroyb...@billon.net> writes: > > On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 19:31:50 -0800, nob...@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill > > Z.) wrote: > > >>LeRoy Blue <leroyb...@billon.net> writes: > > >>> Fallacy; the refuge of the defeated. > > >>Wrong - not a fallacy at all. We were discussing facts, not voter > >>decisions, nor whether some marital arrangement is acceptable to > >>people. > > >>BTW, I'd say exactly the same thing regardless of whether I was in > >>favor of Proposition Eight or opposed to it: domestic partnerships > >>simply are not legally equivalent to marriage for the reasons the > >>California Supreme Court stated, and that is what was being > >>discussed. > > > The people contend that two people of the same sex cannot marry. A > > marriage can only be the joining of one man and one woman. Equivalency > > is not a factor. > > The "equivalency," in case you didn't notice, was the topic of > discussion. If you are not interested in that topic, then post > a follow up to something else. It was not, you jackass. > > >>I might also add that there are any number of reasons to vote no on > >>Proposition Eight regardless of one's opinion about same-sex > >>marriages. One reason is that Proposition Eight would insert text > >>into Article I, Section 7 (the new text being in Article I, section > >>7.5) that is simply out of place. > > > No, the people think it's entirely appropriate. > > No, there is no evidence of that regardless of how the vote turns out. > A large number of voters don't think about such issues at all and are > merely influenced by the TV ads they see. Is it not fortunate for you people that informed consent is not one of the requirements to vote? :-)) - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<90ce0017-3201-4996-a88c-7b1c30a415fd@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<c0c5fef993b772586ad491e239a5debe@dizum.com> <ge88u2$75q$1@snarked.org> <871vy0mekt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <geahc1$e50$2@snarked.org> <87iqrbt7xu.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <9f0fc340-a744-43d3-83c2-3392ace12879@u29g2000pro.googlegroups.com> <8763n9x55g.fsf@pacbell.net> <c06lg4hal7ik8j1sl7e5oj87n3ad3arfuv@4ax.com> <877i7omorr.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <0dlsg4dougt2ajvnl3d8nrg9170vuqh4ta@4ax.com> <87tzappjrt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <2a4vg4160615v46tpgfvlg9mc8tn2iba8d@4ax.com> <87y700kuis.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10a89e,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Thread: f824f,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Thread: 10d50a,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Attributes: gid10a89e,gidf824f,gid10d50a,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: kujebak <kujebak@eudoramail.com> Newsgroups: sac.general,ba.general,ba.politics,la.general,scruz.general Subject: Re: Vote NO on Prop Eight Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 06:51:06 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 49 Message-ID: <90ce0017-3201-4996-a88c-7b1c30a415fd@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com> References: <c0c5fef993b772586ad491e239a5debe@dizum.com> <ge88u2$75q$1@snarked.org> <871vy0mekt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <geahc1$e50$2@snarked.org> <87iqrbt7xu.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <9f0fc340-a744-43d3-83c2-3392ace12879@u29g2000pro.googlegroups.com> <8763n9x55g.fsf@pacbell.net> <c06lg4hal7ik8j1sl7e5oj87n3ad3arfuv@4ax.com> <877i7omorr.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <0dlsg4dougt2ajvnl3d8nrg9170vuqh4ta@4ax.com> <87tzappjrt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <2a4vg4160615v46tpgfvlg9mc8tn2iba8d@4ax.com> <87y700kuis.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.109.227.149 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1225810266 1779 127.0.0.1 (4 Nov 2008 14:51:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:51:06 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.109.227.149; posting-account=bT5vFAkAAADdMqzMxMiDxXq84bMYshvA User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; InfoPath.1; MS-RTC LM 8),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)