Texas Bans Gay Marriage

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174993,00.html

 

 

The backlash continues.

[GoodAsGould]

is it really a surprise that Texas banned it?

[Wong & Owens]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174993,00.html

The backlash continues.

 

 

Brand new, from the state that brought you the "No Sexy Cheerleading" mandate!

[FlaSoxxJim]

backlash against what? The concept of a Constitutional guarantee of equal rights for all American citizens?

 

YEEEHAW! :banghead

[Rex Kickass]

Actually, some constitutional scholars are saying that this WILL backlash against the "breeders" (loved that Cannonball song) because its so vaguely worded it could be outlawing regular marriage.

[CanOfCorn]

I woke up this morning and had the Texas Legislature IN MY BED?!?! What the...? It's strange, cuz I thought government wasn't supposed to be in my house? I mean, there's my fiancee and there's Gov. Rick Perry right next to her.

 

^^^^^^^^^^

That's sarcasm.

 

I voted against it, but I seriously considered kap's words when he said he didn't vote for or against because the government shouldn't be in our houses.

[kapkomet]

YEA! I'm famous, clear down in Austin.

[The Critic]

I woke up this morning and had the Texas Legislature IN MY BED?!?!  What the...?  It's strange, cuz I thought government wasn't supposed to be in my house?  I mean, there's my fiancee and there's Gov. Rick Perry right next to her.

 

^^^^^^^^^^

That's sarcasm.

 

I voted against it, but I seriously considered kap's words when he said he didn't vote for or against because the government shouldn't be in our houses.

 

WAIT JUST ONE MINUTE!!! Did you say FIANCEE?????

You bed down your LADY out of wedded bliss????

Oh wait, that's not sinnin' - just them crazy homos wantin' to get hitched is sinnin'...

[Balta1701]

Well...thanks to this the good folks of Texas are now well protected from...well...whatever it is, they're protected from it. And thank God.

 

Btw, on the other side of the coin, Maine became the last New England state to ban discrimination on account of sexual orientation.

[KipWellsFan]

backlash against what?  The concept of a Constitutional guarantee of equal rights for all American citizens?

 

YEEEHAW!  :banghead

 

Yah I second that, what backlash?

[zach61]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174993,00.html

The backlash continues.

 

Yay. Now I can sleep at night knowing that another group of American citizens have lost some of their rights. Now that the gays can't marry, divorce and adultery will go way down and the institution of marriage is saved. Good to see all this effort put into what consenting adults do and not worry about the pedaphiles out there that rape our children.

[Balta1701]

Yah I second that, what backlash?

It is a backlash. We can't have anything happen in this country that the Republicans consider "Icky".

[CanOfCorn]

WAIT JUST ONE MINUTE!!! Did you say FIANCEE?????

You bed down your LADY out of wedded bliss????

Oh wait, that's not sinnin' - just them crazy homos wantin' to get hitched is sinnin'...

 

 

I'm Jewish, I'm already going to hell...or have a place in heaven as one of the Chosen People, if you prefer.

 

This is what I'd like to do to the blowhard jagbags in ANY state government that wants to be in my home like this:

[CanOfCorn]

YEA!  I'm famous, clear down in Austin. 

 

Even a Dallas fascist can say the occasional thing that us pinko commie liberals here in Austin might just agree with!!!

 

[Soxy]

Well, between this and the Kansas science debacle, I'm at a loss for words. Way to go America (too sad for green).

[Balta1701]

Well, between this and the Kansas science debacle, I'm at a loss for words. Way to go America (too sad for green).

Don't miss 1 thing...the Dover PA voters tossed out all of the Republicans who were insisting that Intelligent Design belongs in science classes.

[Gene Honda Civic]

Don't miss 1 thing...the Dover PA voters tossed out all of the Republicans who were insisting that Intelligent Design belongs in science classes.

My Brother called me for help on a problem for his Differential Equations class.

 

I told him to write that DifEQ was too complicated to done by mortals. Clearly a higher being had something to do with these equations.

 

/My new excuse for everything.

[Soxy]

My Brother called me for help on a problem for his Differential Equations class.

 

I told him to write that DifEQ was too complicated to done by mortals. Clearly a higher being had something to do with these equations.

 

/My new excuse for everything.

OMG! I am so using that next time I get asked a questionin Learning and Evolutionary Psych. BRILLIANT!!!!

[bmags]

i've read a couple of interviews with scientists who said they are fine with the teaching of ID as long as they also teach the real science. So i'm like f*** it...whatever they do, as long as the actual science using things that are measurable is taught...its cool.

[Balta1701]

i've read a couple of interviews with scientists who said they are fine with the teaching of ID as long as they also teach the real science. So i'm like f*** it...whatever they do, as long as the actual science using things that are measurable is taught...its cool.

The only question that matters, of course, is how many of those scientists are named Steve?

[bmags]

about 1%

 

seriously thou, i feel this is a battle that if the science community is going to lose, that they don't lose outright, and still have evolution taught...although they shouldn't lose.

[Soxy]

about 1%

 

seriously thou, i feel this is a battle that if the science community is going to lose, that they don't lose outright, and still have evolution taught...although they shouldn't lose.

See, here's the thing.

 

I don't tell Doctors how best to heal people. I don't tell my mechanic how to fix my car. I don't tell my grocery cashiers how to bag my groceries.

 

Why? Because that's not my job. My training is not in those areas. I want my medical advice from a licensed doctor. I was my car fixed by a trained mechanic. And I want my science from people trained in science.

 

The question isn't oh, well, at least evolution will still be taught. The question is: why are we ignoring the people with the most training in this area and choosing to listen to people with far less experience/knowledge about the topic. As a nation, if we continue to allow our children's education to be compromised by theologians and religious zealots who are ignorant to the scientific method, we are committing (in my mind) a grave crime against those children, future generations, and ourselves. This debate has been laid to rest in mainline (and any respectable) scientific theories and deserves to be treated as any other refuted theory.

[bmags]

See, here's the thing.

 

I don't tell Doctors how best to heal people. I don't tell my mechanic how to fix my car. I don't tell my grocery cashiers how to bag my groceries.

 

Why? Because that's not my job. My training is not in those areas. I want my medical advice from a licensed doctor. I was my car fixed by a trained mechanic. And I want my science from people trained in science.

 

The question isn't oh, well, at least evolution will still be taught. The question is: why are we ignoring the people with the most training in this area and choosing to listen to people with far less experience/knowledge about the topic. As a nation, if we continue to allow our children's education to be compromised by theologians and religious zealots who are ignorant to the scientific method, we are committing (in my mind) a grave crime against those children, future generations, and ourselves. This debate has been laid to rest in mainline (and any respectable) scientific theories and deserves to be treated as any other refuted theory.

 

yes, and i agree, i'm not an advocate for creationism or ID, i was pissed to see Kansas' decision, however, if science is going to lose this battle i want at least for kids to be presented what they should be presented, and what their crazy parents want them to be presented. Not just crazy parents.

[jackie hayes]

See, here's the thing.

 

I don't tell Doctors how best to heal people. I don't tell my mechanic how to fix my car. I don't tell my grocery cashiers how to bag my groceries.

 

Why? Because that's not my job. My training is not in those areas. I want my medical advice from a licensed doctor. I was my car fixed by a trained mechanic. And I want my science from people trained in science.

 

The question isn't oh, well, at least evolution will still be taught. The question is: why are we ignoring the people with the most training in this area and choosing to listen to people with far less experience/knowledge about the topic. As a nation, if we continue to allow our children's education to be compromised by theologians and religious zealots who are ignorant to the scientific method, we are committing (in my mind) a grave crime against those children, future generations, and ourselves. This debate has been laid to rest in mainline (and any respectable) scientific theories and deserves to be treated as any other refuted theory.

Hmm... I want to criticize this argument without disagreeing with your end result in the least. Taken to the extreme, your argument would seem to imply that (say) a hs history teacher, b/c he knows more about history than the school board, should be able to teach whatever he wants. I'm sure there are history teachers out there who have some pretty odd notions that we don't want kids to learn. There is a role for this sort of oversight, just like I (or a family member) have to approve medical treatments and car repairs before they're done, and just like the cashier will f***ing hear something if he puts my bananas at the bottom of the bag.

 

The problem isn't that people outside of science are deciding what to teach and what not to teach, that's inevitable. It's just that they made a piss-poor decision. Then the voters in Pennsylvania, also not scientists, made the right one. If the board members in Kansas (and, ultimately, the voters) want to be morons and f*** up their kids, well, it's sad, but they should be the ones deciding that.

 

I think you also give way too much credit to id, in calling it a refuted theory. There's no theory to refute. There is a substantive negative claim: Darwinism is not right, because there is in some sense too much biological complexity. That's a fine, scientific claim. They've shown nothing of the sort, but it is science. But it's just part of Darwinism, it's part of that debate, it's no positive theory of the origin of species.

 

The positive side of id is not science, it's just a big fricking assumption. Since that positive part is the only thing that "competes" with Darwinism, it would be nice if it were actually science -- testable. Seems fair.

 

At best, the idea belongs in a metaphysics class. It belongs in science no more than Aquinas' first-mover idea belongs in a physics class. (Can't you imagine it? -- Newton's "laws" are only one of many competing theories...)

 

What's funny is thinking about how uncomfortable this overall argument should make Republicans. You know, Marxist theory "competes" far better with classical equilibrium economics as a theory of production, than id does with evolution. Just saying... (From someone who is very pro-free markets, and who lights into anyone who thinks Marx has an ounce of credibility.)

 

So in summary, the Texas gay marriage ban is bad.

 

Really, I don't think we should worry so much about this. The recent spike in pirate stories suggests there are more pirates, while global temperatures continue to rise, a paradox that clearly signals the end of the world. Can't we all just get along in the short time we have left?

[Balta1701]

Really, I don't think we should worry so much about this.  The recent spike in pirate stories suggests there are more pirates, while global temperatures continue to rise, a paradox that clearly signals the end of the world.  Can't we all just get along in the short time we have left?