• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California gay marriage ban overturned: report

Status
Not open for further replies.
They must also be asexual.... :doh

Nuns. Only Nuns should hear this case. Do we have any judges who also happen to be nuns?

Oh, wait - married to Jesus.

Spinster elementary school teachers with clasp sweaters and glasses on the tips of their noses? Do we have any of those?
 
What I have been hearing(and I have been waiting for this decision all day...) is that most likely it will be held, as allowing marriages to go forward would create legal and ethical problems until a final verdict is reached in the last appeal. No one knows for sure yet, but I would bet on a stay.

I will post this again

Judge overturns Calif. gay marriage ban - Yahoo! News

Despite the favorable ruling for same-sex couples, gay marriage will not be allowed to resume immediately. Judge Walker said he wants to decide whether his order should be suspended while the proponents of the ban pursue their appeal in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
 
Activist judge: One who rules not on the law or the will of the people but on personal politics.

Will of the people = argumentum ad populum

And what about his ruling makes you think it wasn't based in sound law?? Be specific.
:waiting:





Every attorney I've talked to, conservative-liberal-moderate, has said the defense presented a piss-poor joke of a case.
 
I know right, if people wouldn't ignorantly be against legal gay marriage, we could be done with it already.

Quit trying to force your morality on the rest of us and this wouldn't happen.
 
I will post this again

Judge overturns Calif. gay marriage ban - Yahoo! News

Despite the favorable ruling for same-sex couples, gay marriage will not be allowed to resume immediately. Judge Walker said he wants to decide whether his order should be suspended while the proponents of the ban pursue their appeal in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Yes, that is what I said. Glad we are in agreement on something. What's more, I even think it is the right thing to do, even if I don't like it.
 
Quit trying to force your morality on the rest of us and this wouldn't happen.

You mean like strait people trying to enforce their morality on gay people?
 
Quit trying to force your morality on the rest of us and this wouldn't happen.

I think the morality forcing is the other way around in this case. It's those opposed to gay marriage who are trying to impose their morality against the rest of us.
 
Quit trying to force your morality on the rest of us and this wouldn't happen.

Um isn't that what your doing? I mean, its not like heterosexual marriage would be outlawed. Stop trying to push your morality on LGBT people.
 
You missed my point. You don't agree with it, so your calling him an activist judge. Have you read the ruling? Do you see anything in there that is a blatant example of "activism"? He used the Constitution as his basis for his ruling, you know the whole equal rights, and freedom thing.

Yes the same thing gays say.
 
It goes against what marriage stand for. Marriage is a covenant with God not a legal issue. A marriage license is a tax on marriage

"God" and your religion are for you, not for everyone else to follow.
It's unconstitutional to force everyone else to follow your religion.
 
Can you please read the ruling and then respond point by point to it as to where you find this ruling to be "activist" vs. logical based on the presented arguments.

If you can do that for me, then you can say "activist judge". Until that point, the only thing you're doing is saying that gays can't be reasonable people (and with your later post - can't be as reasonable as heterosexual married people).

It goes against the state constitutional amendment process. He used federal constitution for a state constitution issue. What does the state constitution say.
 
It goes against what marriage stand for. Marriage is a covenant with God not a legal issue. A marriage license is a tax on marriage

No, its not, its a legal partnership. You don't stop atheist's from getting married so it obviously isn't a covenant with God. This is in the legal sense, you can get married in a purely religious ceremony, but it won't be recognized by the state unless you get a legal marriage license.
 
You mean like strait people trying to enforce their morality on gay people?

Has nothing to do with Straight people, it has to do with a minority of people trying to change a social construct. In this case, the definition of Marriage.

Which is where my disagreement with the whole issue lay. I personally am not bothered by "Gay Marriage", I am however bothered by the way it's being pushed, forced.

110% behind Civil Unions that have all the legal force of Marriage. Don't call it marriage though. Why is that so hard to compromise on? Cause it doesn't advance the proper political agenda.
 
It goes against the state constitutional amendment process. He used federal constitution for a state constitution issue. What does the state constitution say.

The due process clause of the 14th amendment applies the constitution to the states.
 
Um isn't that what your doing? I mean, its not like heterosexual marriage would be outlawed. Stop trying to push your morality on LGBT people.

Dear, you haven't a clue where I stand on the LGBT community, don't pre-judge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom