Nice sidestepping the question
But if a State does not meet those requirements, then the Federal government will have to step in to make sure that it does. Does that even make sense to you? You seem horrifically caught up on that one point.
don't talk about liberal elitism on a thread about a CA judge overturning a proposition
unbelievable
there is an easily, readily demonstrated case (see above) for seeing this thread as entirely about liberal elitism
hello
but only if one is free to make it
Should it not be addressed on the state level first?
So the state had no responsibility to meet federal standards. If they did it would be a state issue
What does liberal elitism (specifically your perceptions of it) have to do with Prop 8 being overturned?
It's not about my research. It's about you getting into a thread without knowing all the facts.
If you're really interested in knowing the history of Prop 8 and how it got to the fed courts, then do your homework and come back when you better understand everything that led up to yesterday's decision.
Start with Prop 22.
If you will not show proof I take it it is false
Dude, you are seriously making yourself look silly by trying to debate something that you are not educated on. The way this works - if you want to participate you have to come prepared. You cannot come into a debate and then tell everyone "Hey....I don't know anything that you are talking about, someone please educate me."
Come PREPARED next time you want to participate, otherwise, please don't come at all because you are not able to intelligently participate.
You are the one not prepared if you can not back up your claims
unbelievable
You need to learn the basics of civics.
No people need to prove their claims with facts
Ah, so more one-liners and feigned outrage. :roll:
No people need to prove their claims with facts
It should go to state court first to let the state address it and explain it
Argument? They don't have the authority to "ban" it.Even with GWB's right-wing activist judges....it is unlikely the Supreme Court is going to have any argument to ban gay marriage.
What part of "California Supreme Court" aren't you clearn on here? It was a STATE court where this ruling came from.
Oh for pete sake. Prop 8 was upheld by the State Supreme Court in May of 2009.
California high court upholds Prop. 8 - Los Angeles Times
It was then appealed to federal Court.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/20090522perrycomp.pdf
And it was then overturned by the federal court.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/20090522perrycomp.pdf
Prop 8 came about because of the supreme court ruling before that. The state court may have not wanted to continue the fight so this was their way to give it to the feds.
I is funny watching people spend more energy making excuses not to show proof then if they had actually showed the proof. Thanks for taking the time.
Why did you need them to show proof? There is virtually no way that the issue could have gotten to federal court had it not gone through the state courts first.
Read em again? Don't make me laugh. I called an entire culture of people deviants, which they are by all measures.
Tim-
Moderator's Warning: |
Read Rule 18. Here... I'll post it:
So, no, you may NOT call those of a particular sexual orientation deviants. Do so again, and you will receive consequences. |
What part of "California Supreme Court" aren't you clearn on here? It was a STATE court where this ruling came from.