Discussion:
Gay marriage opponents turn in signatures...how will you vote?
(too old to reply)
Albee Kuminova
2004-07-01 21:52:56 UTC
Permalink
From KATU and the AP


SALEM, ORE. - Backers of a ban on gay marriage turned in more than
244,000 signatures Wednesday to place the issue before Oregon voters
this fall.

It was twice the number needed and the highest number of signatures ever
submitted for an initiative measure in Oregon.

Several dozen members of the Defense of Marriage Coalition traveled to
the Capitol to turn in boxes of signatures to the Secretary of State and
to publicly kick off the fall campaign.

Standing with other coalition members on the front steps of the Capitol,
campaign spokesman Tim Nashif drew cheers from the others when he
announced that 244,587 signatures had been collected.

"That was just in five weeks," Nashif said, referring to the
late-starting signature drive that drew heavily on support from churches
and individual volunteers across the state.

While the signatures still must be verified by the state, both sides
said the large turn-in all but assures that the Oregon voters will be
called upon to decide the contentious social issue this fall.

Basic Rights Oregon, the state's leading gay rights group, said it will
launch a statewide campaign to defeat the measure.

"While it is disappointing that the measure is likely to be on the
November ballot, we are committed to defending the thousands of
Oregonians who would be profoundly harmed by a loss of equal marriage
protections and responsibilities," said Roey Thorpe, the group's
director.

From KATU and the AP
*******************************************************************************************

IMO, the number of signatures turned in in so short a time says much. I
just wonder how down and dirty the homosexuals will get in the campaign.
How about their lie about folks at a food bank being forced to sign a
petition to get food? When the truth came out the homosexuals choked on
it. What part of "keep in in the bedroom" can't they understand? If I
get a chance to vote gay marriage down I know how I will vote. What
about you?
Gregory Gadow
2004-07-01 21:58:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Albee Kuminova
From KATU and the AP
SALEM, ORE. - Backers of a ban on gay marriage turned in more than
244,000 signatures Wednesday to place the issue before Oregon voters
this fall.
It was twice the number needed and the highest number of signatures ever
submitted for an initiative measure in Oregon.
Can the Oregon constitution be amended by initiative?

The real question is whether an initiative-created law would stand against constitutional
review.
--
Gregory Gadow
***@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear

"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is
tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists
for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering, http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm
Albee Kuminova
2004-07-01 23:09:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Gadow
Post by Albee Kuminova
From KATU and the AP
SALEM, ORE. - Backers of a ban on gay marriage turned in more than
244,000 signatures Wednesday to place the issue before Oregon voters
this fall.
It was twice the number needed and the highest number of signatures ever
submitted for an initiative measure in Oregon.
Can the Oregon constitution be amended by initiative?
The real question is whether an initiative-created law would stand against constitutional
review.
--
Gregory Gadow
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is
tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists
for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering, http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm
Yeah, it could be interesting. But from what I know, and that ain't a
lot, the constitution can indeed be changed by an initiative driven
petition/election. And even if not. IF the vote were over whelming the
legislators might feel the pressure; either way.
Bob Tiernan
2004-07-01 23:41:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Gadow
Can the Oregon constitution be amended by initiative?
Veeeeerrrry carefully. You see, the way the courts
and some activist special interest people (like
property rights haters) have been operating
lately, a simple comma will be pointed to as an
additional subject, thereby invalidating the
entire initiative.

Bob T
Baxter
2004-07-01 23:53:15 UTC
Permalink
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Gregory Gadow
Post by Albee Kuminova
From KATU and the AP
SALEM, ORE. - Backers of a ban on gay marriage turned in more than
244,000 signatures Wednesday to place the issue before Oregon voters
this fall.
It was twice the number needed and the highest number of signatures ever
submitted for an initiative measure in Oregon.
Can the Oregon constitution be amended by initiative?
Yes. The next question is should the constitution be allowed to be changed
by petition. The third question is should we enshrine discrimination into
our constitution.
Hal Lillywhite
2004-07-02 03:00:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Gadow
Can the Oregon constitution be amended by initiative?
Absolutely! In fact there have been several such initiatives passed
in recent years.
Post by Gregory Gadow
The real question is whether an initiative-created law would stand against constitutional
There's the rub. The Powers That Be don't like the voters to be able
to do this so they try to find ways to declare such amendments
unconstitutional. Unfortunately those same people are charged with
defending the constitutionality of said initiatives and it's easy for
them to mount a less than stellar defense.
Hal Lillywhite
2004-07-02 03:01:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Gadow
Can the Oregon constitution be amended by initiative?
Absolutely! In fact there have been several such initiatives passed
in recent years.
Post by Gregory Gadow
The real question is whether an initiative-created law would stand against constitutional
There's the rub. The Powers That Be don't like the voters to be able
to do this so they try to find ways to declare such amendments
unconstitutional. Unfortunately those same people are charged with
defending the constitutionality of said initiatives and it's easy for
them to mount a less than stellar defense.
sinistersteve
2004-07-01 23:11:12 UTC
Permalink
Here's what will happen, as it does to most ballot measures in Oregon.....it
will pass by a large margin, get referred to courts where it will be
declared that it is unconstitutional....making voting, once again, worthless
in Oregon.
--
I'm Sinistersteve, and I approve this message.
Albee Kuminova
2004-07-01 23:22:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by sinistersteve
Here's what will happen, as it does to most ballot measures in Oregon.....it
will pass by a large margin, get referred to courts where it will be
declared that it is unconstitutional....making voting, once again, worthless
in Oregon.
--
I'm Sinistersteve, and I approve this message.
Yeah. We could sure save money if we sent measures to the courts before
the voters got to vote. :-) I'm tired of the judicial branch becoming
the legislative branch.
unknown
2004-07-04 03:24:16 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 23:11:12 GMT, "sinistersteve"
Post by sinistersteve
Here's what will happen, as it does to most ballot measures in Oregon.....it
will pass by a large margin, get referred to courts where it will be
declared that it is unconstitutional....making voting, once again, worthless
in Oregon.
You are correct. People think stupid measures are passed into law? I
wonder if someone (one of our representatives) would care to actually
represent the people and made this measure law when the legislative
branch was last in session.

But now the people have to make laws to cover stupid issues...like can
a group of people who enjoy shoving cocks up each others butts...can
those people marry each other?

Here are some other laws we need that due so far to the high level of
common sense prevalent that they were not needed. But given the lack
of brains on the part of progressives....here are some other dumb laws
we should implement.

1. Do not spit into the wind.
2. Never shit facing downhill.


What else is there to legislate...they've got a law just about
covering everything else. Our founding fathers never dreamed
coscksuckers would be trying to get married! What else did they forget
to make a law about?

hmmm
1. That the act of stripping is not a form of free speech...
I bet they had a lot of "all nude" clubs in those days.
2. Hmmmm if an athiests claims harm because there is a little 1 inch
cross on the city seal...then the athiest must show us the harm!!
3. That Christmas shall always be called Christmas tress and not
festival trees,<---- another case of wimpy athiests being afraid of
something that they claim does not exist.
Scratch
2004-07-04 03:59:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 23:11:12 GMT, "sinistersteve"
Post by sinistersteve
Here's what will happen, as it does to most ballot measures in Oregon.....it
will pass by a large margin, get referred to courts where it will be
declared that it is unconstitutional....making voting, once again, worthless
in Oregon.
You are correct. People think stupid measures are passed into law? I
wonder if someone (one of our representatives) would care to actually
represent the people and made this measure law when the legislative
branch was last in session.
But now the people have to make laws to cover stupid issues...like can
a group of people who enjoy shoving cocks up each others butts...can
those people marry each other?
Here are some other laws we need that due so far to the high level of
common sense prevalent that they were not needed. But given the lack
of brains on the part of progressives....here are some other dumb laws
we should implement.
1. Do not spit into the wind.
2. Never shit facing downhill.
What else is there to legislate...they've got a law just about
covering everything else. Our founding fathers never dreamed
coscksuckers would be trying to get married! What else did they forget
to make a law about?
hmmm
1. That the act of stripping is not a form of free speech...
I bet they had a lot of "all nude" clubs in those days.
2. Hmmmm if an athiests claims harm because there is a little 1 inch
cross on the city seal...then the athiest must show us the harm!!
3. That Christmas shall always be called Christmas tress and not
festival trees,<---- another case of wimpy athiests being afraid of
something that they claim does not exist.
Very well said Yaya and oh so true.

Peace!
Daniel Bendiksen
2004-07-08 07:13:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 23:11:12 GMT, "sinistersteve"
Post by sinistersteve
Here's what will happen, as it does to most ballot measures in Oregon.....it
will pass by a large margin, get referred to courts where it will be
declared that it is unconstitutional....making voting, once again, worthless
in Oregon.
You are correct. People think stupid measures are passed into law? I
wonder if someone (one of our representatives) would care to actually
represent the people and made this measure law when the legislative
branch was last in session.
But now the people have to make laws to cover stupid issues...like can
a group of people who enjoy shoving cocks up each others butts...can
those people marry each other?
You seem to pick on gay only stuff... You omit the lesbian side... As far
as I know, as a general group they don't enjoy putting things up their
rears.

I ask you, what's the issue with letting people, even same sex people,
marry? Should we really deny them the state/federal granted perks of
marriage just because the fell in love with a person of the same sex?

Worse, should we discriminate against them simply because they believe
something different than most do? ... If we did that all through history
(actually, we did), then we'd probably still believe that the universe
orbits the Earth, and that the Earth is flat.

Oh, and as for progressive thinkers throughout history, most were
ridiculed, persecuted, if not outright tarred, feathered and hung?

Oh yes, and for TRUE believers of the Bible and Gods' way... First, judge
not, that is reserved for God, and you are not God. Second, take Jesus's
example and cast not the stone unless you are 100% free of evil yourself.
Post by unknown
Here are some other laws we need that due so far to the high level of
common sense prevalent that they were not needed. But given the lack
of brains on the part of progressives....here are some other dumb laws
we should implement.
1. Do not spit into the wind.
2. Never shit facing downhill.
Hmmm... Should we repeal the law that makes horse theft a hanging offense?

Or, how about we make divorce illegal?

Wait, better! Maybe we should make something that costs far more innocent
lives a hanging offense.... DRUG DEALING!
Post by unknown
What else is there to legislate...they've got a law just about
covering everything else. Our founding fathers never dreamed
coscksuckers would be trying to get married! What else did they forget
to make a law about?
Actually, same sex stuff has existed throughout history. Heck, it was
written about in the Bible wasn't it? So, our founding fathers knew about
it.

---

This is what I believe...

1) The "state" (meaning the govt't) is trying to separate church and state.
2) "Marriage" is a church thing

I believe that the state should not discriminate... They should offer civil
unions, making no difference between same-sex and different-sex unions.

The church should be able to say whatever they want about marriage. That's
their domain. The state should separate from church, and offer only civil
unions and no marriages.

There, how's that for something you're likely to swear about??

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...