Proposition 8 discussion continued - Page 36 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-23-2008, 09:54 PM   #526
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
Don't forget wearing a wedding ring. That shouts straight form the freaking rooftops.


i know, right? that ring is all, "dude, i love chicks! i put my penis in a vagina! i'm all about being hetero and *you* MUST accept me and my lifestyle!"

it's very rude. because whenever i think of straight people, all i think of is them fucking each other. because that's all heterosexuality is. fucking. there's nothing more to it than that. fucking.

that's it.

fucking. maybe some oral. who knows what *they* do in that lifestyle.

but it's only about sex.

unlike my beautiful, multi-dimensional, complex homosexuality.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:26 PM   #527
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:27 AM
All relationships related to sex, it makes sense to me, although I have better luck of passing on my genes than you

__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2008, 08:34 AM   #528
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 07:27 PM
Quote:
California's Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) confirmed Monday that it will investigate allegations that the LDS Church failed to report nonmonetary contributions to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign.
Probe into LDS Church's Prop 8 donations going forward - Salt Lake Tribune
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2008, 10:36 AM   #529
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 07:27 PM
NH civil union sponsor will push for gay marriage
By Associated Press | Saturday, November 29, 2008

CONCORD, N.H. - The legislator who sponsored New Hampshire’s civil union bill will push next year to legalize same-sex marriage.

But Portsmouth Democrat Jim Splaine will face a fight, as those opposed to civil unions vow to try to pare the law down.

Splaine says civil unions give same-sex couples about 90 percent of the benefits and obligations that heterosexual couples get through marriage. He says same-sex marriage is the only way for same-sex couples to attain full equality. Splaine describes the bill as necessary to propel debate.

Meanwhile, there will be debate on the current law.

Hooksett Republican David Hess has filed a request to repeal a portion of the law that recognizes same-sex marriages from other states as civil unions in New Hampshire.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2008, 10:39 AM   #530
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:27 PM
^ good god, who is your new avatar?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2008, 10:43 AM   #531
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 07:27 PM
lol, Daniel Craig silly

Can someone vote that I can marry him? thanks
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2008, 10:56 AM   #532
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 04:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
Can someone vote that I can marry him? thanks
I'll vote yes on that.
__________________
martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2008, 11:07 AM   #533
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 07:27 PM
Thanks Martha. Now vote me lots of plastic surgery and I'll be all set.

Don't mean to make light of the topic at all, sorry.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2008, 11:07 PM   #534
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:27 PM


The Church's response:

Quote:
False Claims on Proposition 8 and the Church's Contributions
From FAIR, the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research


Criticism: Opponents claim the Church improperly contributed to the success of the campaign to support California Prop 8. First, opponents criticize the Church for donating money directly to the “yes on 8” campaign. This claim is false. Records filed with the State of California indicate that the Church did not make any contributions with the exception of an "in kind" contribution (non monetary) for travel expenses for a single general authority. All other LDS-related money was contributed by Church members individually, not by the Church. Secondly, critics claim that members of the Church outside of California contributed to the “yes on 8" campaign, and this involvement of people outside of California was improper.

The following chart shows the amounts of money contributed by both in-state and out-of-state individuals and groups to each side.





For Proposition 8

$25,388,955 In-State Donations
$10,733,582 Out-of-State Donations
$36,122,538 Total Donations

Against Proposition 8

$26,464,589 In-State Donations
$11,968,285 Out-of-State Donations
$38,432,873 Total Donations

Totals
$51,853,544
$22,701,867
$74,555,411

Source: Tracking the money, Los Angeles Times


Note that out-of-state contributions to the "No" side were over $1.2 million higher than the out-of-state contributions to the "Yes" side. A third claim is that the Church violated its tax-exempt status by participating in the “Yes on 8" campaign. According to IRS rules, a tax-exempt organization may not support particular candidates or parties. However, the church did not participate in or intervene in any of the political campaigns for any of the candidates running in the 2008 election. The IRS does, however, permit a Church to take positions on issues.

Critics then claim that companies the Church owns violated those rules.

Companies that are owned by the Church, such as Bonneville Communications, are in business to make a profit. These businesses pay their taxes just like any other business: They are not part of the tax-exempt portion of the Church. They have the same opportunities and rights to act in this manner as any other tax paying entities in our country.
Another claim is that contributions by Church members were unfairly considered tax deductible. This is patently false. California members who chose to donate to the Prop 8 campaign were explicitly told that their donations would not be tax deductible. None of the funds donated to the campaign are allowed as deductions. Critics claim that members were told by the Church how much to contribute. Church headquarters did not pass down individual contribution goals to members. In some cases local Church leaders may have asked members to contribute a specific amount. Some goals were suggested to the general membership by their Stake President, such as “one dollar per day.” Some Stakes provided wards with goals that they were expected to meet. Humanitarian efforts Critics have been making the claim that the Church invested more money in Proposition 8 than in all of its combined humanitarian efforts. The question is not relevant, since the Church as an organization did not donate any money to “Yes on 8.” The Church does, however, fund a significant humanitarian effort through member donations. The amount contributed by the Church to humanitarian causes far outweighs anything that individual members contributed toward the effort to pass Prop 8. Critics do not seem as concerned about the money that could have been donated to humanitarian causes that was donated to the “No on 8" campaign instead. Conclusion

The Church did not donate any funds to support Proposition 8. That members exercised their consciences to donate funds or to participate in voluntary activities to express their views is in the best traditional of citizenship.

There are many other issues which draw critical attention. The full FAIR wiki article may be accessed by clicking here.

Another question Prop 8:

Those opposing Prop 8 outspent those in favor by the tune of $2,000,000.
What's the problem?

More info:

Proposition 8 - Tracking the money - Los Angeles Times

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2008, 11:21 PM   #535
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 05:27 PM
"California's Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) confirmed Monday that it will investigate allegations that the LDS Church failed to report nonmonetary contributions to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign"

Probe into LDS Church's Prop 8 donations going forward - Salt Lake Tribune
__________________
toscano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 12:30 AM   #536
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 06:27 PM
Time for a little dose of humor. Here's a funny and star-studded skit on Prop 8.

"Prop 8 - The Musical" starring Jack Black, John C. Reilly, and many more... from FOD Team, Jack Black, Craig Robinson, John C Reilly, and Rashida Jones
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 02:07 AM   #537
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Lol@nph
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 08:10 AM   #538
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 04:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post


and then...

Protect Marriage, Protect Children, Prohibit Divorce from Jonathan Smith

Something Irvine has already mentioned.
__________________
martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 09:44 AM   #539
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 05:27 PM
"Voters' economic status and religious convictions played a greater role than race and age in determining whether they supported the Nov. 4 ballot measure outlawing same-sex marriage in California, a new poll shows."

"The poll also showed that the measure got strong backing from voters who did not attend college (69 percent), voters who earned less than $40,000 a year (63 percent)"

"People who identified themselves as practicing Christians were highly likely to support the constitutional amendment"

Do they call it practicing because they still don't understand Jesus' message yet and they're trying to wrap their (apparently not very well educated) heads around it ?
__________________
toscano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 03:04 PM   #540
War Child
 
u2gek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sunny CA
Posts: 715
Local Time: 05:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
This is so funny! I loved it. Too bad the one's that should see it and identify with the hypocrisy of it won't get it. Shellfish is an abomination! Who knew?
__________________

__________________
u2gek is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com