Page 30 of 189 FirstFirst ... 2028293031324080130 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #291
    Professor
    Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pocono Mountains, PA
    Last Seen
    05-24-11 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,363

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Yes they are people, but the Constitution gives people the right to vote.
    Either you misunderstand what is going on here or are purposely trying to avoid the issue.

    Are you seriously suggesting that if the people vote to deprive others of their rights, then there's nothing that can be done about it? If, say, the majority passed a law that made it illegal to be a Christian, that you would be fine with that since the majority rules? That if they voted to take away the right of women to hold jobs, you wouldn't mind?

    Do you think the majority is ever wrong legally?

  2. #292
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,983

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    But the thing is, he didn't say I'm gay I oppose it. He used constitutional law.
    He spun the Constitution to fit a belief that was comfortable for him. Many federal judges have disagreed in that other states who passed similar things had their propositions put into law and opposition was struck down in court. You can spin the Constitution to mean just about anything if you want.
    Also it doesn't matter if the majority don't agree with it. The majority didn't agree with the civil rights movement, but you wouldn't say that was a bad thing would you? It was stupid to put it up to a vote anyway, it was unconstitutional, and wrong. The fact is that the government has no right to deny gays the right to marry. You have nothing but a religious argument to stand on, and that will get laughed out of court. Procreation isn't a prerequisite for marriage, and gay people can have children anyway. It may be harder but it can happen. Your trying to impose your beliefs on people, not the other way around. You could use the same argument against integration, " well I don't wanna be around black people, so we should keep Jim Crow in tact. They might think we should integrate, but they shouldn't impose their beliefs on me" The opposition to gay marriage hasn't a leg to stand on, and hopefully the courts will recognize that.
    I would like to see proof that the majority didn't agree with the civil rights movement. And the civil rights movement is not equal with the homosexual movement. Marriage is largely a social construct, why is it wrong to ask society to legally define it when there is confusion among the state? Why does the government have no rights to deny gays the right to marry? If I remember correctly Clinton signed into law DOMA, which federally defines marriage as traditional. However, the federal government doesn't infringe upon the rights of state's to define marriage for themselves. I would have no objection if the majority of California voted against proposition 8 and later voted to legally define marriage as a union between anyone of any sexual orientation. My issue is that the voters voted and the proposition was not found to be unconstitutional. California Dems were surprised when they saw that Prop 8 passed, so they went to plan B and had a gay judge wrongfully rule that it is unconstitutional for people to have a voice.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  3. #293
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Yes they are people, but the Constitution gives people the right to vote. A gay person's vote is equal with a straight person's vote. Are those who voted for Prop 8 not people? Do they deserve to have their rights trampled on?
    The people are not allowed to make laws the contradict the Constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    You can't infringe upon people's right to vote. Should we repeal child consent ages? Because you infringe upon a 13 year old's right to have sex with grannies/grandpa's if he finds them attractive. Laws are enforced morality that are deemed to be moral by society. Anything could be claimed as a "right."
    Yes you can, at least at the federal level, with the states it can vary.

    Your religious morality is not the same for everyone else.
    Laws are about equity and reason.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  4. #294
    Professor
    Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pocono Mountains, PA
    Last Seen
    05-24-11 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,363

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    you talk about law

    i do politics

    this is just another loser

    once more, elites know best, voters be damned

    live it, you lucky

    it's YOURS!
    Once more, I am amused by your apparent glee when losing. Are you actually Bizarro Prof?

  5. #295
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Yes they are. They want to impose their definition of marriage upon everyone at the legal level. They are left alone by zealots. It isn't illegal to be gay. And if I was in California I would absolutely have this imposed on me. I would have voted for Prop 8, my vote would contribute to it's passing. Having a judge rule my beliefs to be unconstitutional and repeal a proposition that the majority of people legally voted for is absolutely an imposition of morals and a violation of my rights as a voter.
    And having the mormon church whip up a bunch of jesus freaks into a frenzy by telling them I am going ban the words mommy and daddy so they can come out and use their votes to tell me I am less a citizen than they are is a violation of MY rights. And all I want is the right to be left the **** alone by your churches and have the same freedom to enjoy the same rights of inheritance and power of attorney between my partner and myself that you do with your partner.

    How about this one? I don't care what you and "fish market" do in the privacy of your own home, but stop running ads in papers to announce your marriages, stop plastering your hypersexual advertisements all over television and sit down and STFU while the rest of us get on with our happy lives together. And when she gets sick with chick cancer, well you can just hope the hospital lets you in to see her or that you shelled out the money for a power of attorney. And when "Melons" ups and croaks, well you can give a huge chunk of what you worked your entire lives together for to the government. But I don't have to because well...I'm not dating a tuna can, which I find morally appalling because its...icky.

    How ****in well do you think that would go over with you if you were in that situation, pal?

    I was asked one non religious valid opinion to oppose gay marriage. The fact that homosexual unions are obviously and biologically different from hetero unions is enough to prevent them from being considered the same union at the legal level.
    And what does the biology have to do with it for homos that is so special that it can't be applied to heteros?

    The issue is that there really wasn't a legal definition for marriage until Prop 8 came along and asked the voters to decide what marriage is. However, those people had their rights as voters revoked and their beliefs ruled to be illegal because some judge wanted to ram his beliefs down everyone's throat.
    First of all, you have no rights as a voter to use that vote to make other voters second class citizens. Secondly, unless he added an addendum that requires you, legally, to go meet and greet every new gay married couple, you haven't had jack **** shoved down your throat. All your whining and complaining is because you didn't get your way and have the chance to elevate yourself above your fellow citizen.

    Go ahead...ask me if I have the first ounce of sympathy for your pitiful plight?

    This case is being brought to the appeals court, and I hope to the supreme court, where the voters will have their rights re-instated and the constitutionality of state's rights being properly put back in place.
    You have no rights to vote away rights of other people. We are a Democratic Republic, not an inquisition mob.

  6. #296
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,983

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Their right to vote was not infringed. They voted and nobody prevented them from doing so.
    Explain what rights are being taken away? I'm straight, if I go to California, is there some right that I've lost?
    Um yes, their right to their votes was infringed upon. They voted, it passed, and then the court ruled that people actually don't have the right to vote on marriage and that it's illegal to say and define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  7. #297
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I was asked one non religious valid opinion to oppose gay marriage. The fact that homosexual unions are obviously and biologically different from hetero unions is enough to prevent them from being considered the same union at the legal level.
    How are they "obviously and biologically different"? Surely you're not suggesting that marriages should be allowed/disallowed based on how the two people involved have sex and whether or not the state thinks that's "natural", are you?


    I was responding to someone saying I had no idea what I was talking about when I stated homosexuality was unnatural.
    It occurs in nature, therefore, it is natural. Hence why your crazy comment was called into question.

  8. #298
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,785

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Some fun quotes from the ruling:

    A state’s interest in an enactment must of course be
    secular in nature. The state does not have an interest in
    enforcing private moral or religious beliefs without an
    accompanying secular purpose. See Lawrence v Texas, 539 US 558,
    571 (2003); see also Everson v Board of Education of Ewing
    Township, 330 US 1, 15 (1947).
    At oral argument on proponents’ motion for summary judgment, the court posed to proponents’ counsel the assumption that “the state’s interest in marriage is procreative” and inquired how permitting same-sex marriage impairs or adversely affects that interest. Doc #228 at 21. Counsel replied that the inquiry was
    “not the legally relevant question,” id, but when pressed for an answer, counsel replied: “Your honor, my answer is: I don’t know. I don’t know.” Id at 23.
    Even Prop 8's lawyers couldn't come up with a reason why same-sex marriage impedes procreation.

    At trial, however, proponents presented only one witness, David Blankenhorn, to address the government interest in marriage. Blankenhorn’s testimony is addressed at length hereafter; suffice it to say that the provided no credible evidence to support any of the claimed adverse effects proponents promised to demonstrate.
    Still reading through the ruling, but it's a pretty solid legal decision. Claims of "activist judge" are just sour grapes, this is good case law.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  9. #299
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Um yes, their right to their votes was infringed upon. They voted, it passed, and then the court ruled that people actually don't have the right to vote on marriage and that it's illegal to say and define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
    So if people voted to take away voting rights from certain people you'd be okay with that right?

    After all the people voted on it right.....

  10. #300
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:17 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,315
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Just thought I would mention this: we are averaging over 100 posts an hour just in this thread right now.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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