Page 7 of 49 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 485

Thread: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

  1. #61
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:01 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,361
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    Can you give me and example where I sided with activist juges..........surely not on abortion or gay marriage.
    Again you evade the challenge. You called the judge in this case activist. Surely you can show where his ruling is flawed.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #62
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    You're right. How dare we let people decide for themselves what marriage is and who they can marry!!! The majority always knows better.

    Why have referdums or elections if activist judges are just going yo over rule the outcome. (Confused)
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  3. #63
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    That's partially because we are not a strict democracy, but rather a democratic republic. There will always be challenges of this nature and need to be, the majority cannot infringe upon the rights of the minority and we review cases as such. Perchance the SCOTUS will reverse it, but that is the process we have. The majority is not king.
    Yes, exactly.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  4. #64
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    Why have referdums or elections if activist judges are just going yo over rule the outcome. (Confused)
    Yes, damn activist judges, who gave them the right to take away our right to all white schools!!!
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  5. #65
    Sage
    Kreton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Last Seen
    11-13-17 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,118

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Yes, exactly.
    For those who oppose this, may I ask why? How does it effect you? Why do you care what two people do?

  6. #66
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    Why have referdums or elections if activist judges are just going yo over rule the outcome. (Confused)
    As pointed out to you earlier, because this is our process. We have laws, and judges rule on law. And they have bene properly doing this, which is why the issue keeps winning in court. The discrimination is against the LAW. I know, judges shouldn't be concern with the law, but whatcha gonna do?

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #67
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,340
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Navy, why do you only ever come back to DP when Gay Marriage involved?

  8. #68
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    For those who oppose this, may I ask why? How does it effect you? Why do you care what two people do?
    What people will say-Because the sanctity of marriage is at stake, the integrity of the American family, and we must keep the values that has made America great.

    What they really mean- Gays are icky, and disgusting, except lesbians are okay in my porn.
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  9. #69
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    So glad you asked, Angel.
    Just looking for something to sink my teeth into.


    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Banning same sex marriage violates the constitution because, as has been discussed in this thread, it applies the protections of marriage to some couples and not others, solely on the basis of discriminating against homosexuals. If there is going to be a law that affects the liberties of some people and not others, especially ones directly involving the government, there must be some compelling external reason. This is how the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment works. The law, both federal and state, is not allowed to arbitrarily discriminate. If it wishes to discriminate, it must prove that it has a good reason. No such reason has ever surfaced.
    Regarding "it applies the protections of marriage to some couples and not others", I can see where that is indeed a significant matter.

    If there is no other recourse for such necessary protections than to marry, then that's a concern.

    It seems that the human nature formation of "a couple" is key here.

    I don't believe anyone would rationally argue that gay couples aren't couples as there are simply too many observations that support the inclusion of gays in coupling.

    So really it all starts with the decision to couple or not.

    Those who choose to be "single", well, they do without some of those protections that marriage affords. But, they made their choice with regard to the calibrated issue of "coupling", and they chose not to couple.

    That seems to be the pivot here, whether people choose to couple, and by coupling I mean, obviously, with a commitment that supports the reasoning for said protections.

    What Prop 8 supporters are arguing, however, is that gays have those protections via civil unions .. and if all the marriage protections are not included in civil unions then civil union laws need to be changed to include them.

    Prop 8 supporters are saying that would allow gays to "couple" in commitment with equal protection.

    Prop 8 supporters are asking for their cultural tradition of marriage to be left alone, to remain defined as "between a man and a woman as husband and wife", and for constitutional equal protection to be afforded in an equal but different manner.

    Would that not be sufficient?

    Prop 8 would be supported by the SCOTUS and states would immediately begin hammering out changes to civil union statutes to provide equal protection.

    My question then is would that solve the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  10. #70
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I am aware of that. However, the times, they are a changing. It is quite possible that SSM will be legal across the country within 5 years. Are you ready? I am.
    Well more states are opting for and amendment defining gay marraige as a union between a man and a woman. Nope as a practicing Catholic I will never be ready to say that the blessed sacrament of marraige should include 2 men, 2 women, 1 man and 2 women, a brother and sister in a non sexual union for the benefits, same for a father and daughter or a mother and son al in non sexual relationships..........That is just me though Redress and don't come back and tell me that can't happen because it can.
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

Page 7 of 49 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •