• 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.
Harry Guerrilla said:
Dude seriously, what has a gay person done to you, for them to receive such treatment?

What's the point of arguing against this?
It makes people look childish.
Click to expand...

What treatment? I have a gay sibling and accept it. But then they do not flaunt it or bring attention to themselves
 
Redress said:
This is another one. I am ecstatic about this ruling. Every one who knows me on this board knows that gay issues are important to me. However, it is perfectly possible to oppose gay marriage without being bigoted, or for bigoted reasons. Let's leave the over the top rhetoric to the other guys, then laugh at them for it.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what you are saying here, but I was not addressing ANYTHING you said. I was replying to a post by The Prof.
 
Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
</oldmanrant>

Why don't you try to convince people, with facts, as to why gay people shouldn't be allowed to get legally married?
Click to expand...

Or apparently be judges.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Some things shouldn't be voted according to the will of the people. The will of the people shouldn't supercede personal rights. Regardless, Prop 8 was passed by a very narrow margin. I wonder how the results would have been if the Mormons wouldn't have gotten involved as heavily as they did.
Click to expand...
Given that Mormons are a small minority everywhere but Utah, the results would have likely been the same. Believe it or not, the people of California don't look to Utah for their guidance on anything.
 
The Prof said:
well, aren't you special!

your mom, bless her heart, must be very proud

unfortunately, you (or, more accurately, some people a little more important than you) are gonna HAVE TO deal with that fallout

it's like gravity, unavoidable
Click to expand...

What's unavoidable is that people like you and various other assorted Rip Van Winkles in this society are either going to get with the times or lead a very, very angsty life from now until the time you join the Dodo bird in extinction.
 
Navy Pride said:
Your problem is my left wing friend is Keennedy has never voted for gay marriage.............He voted on the texas case and I agree with him on that one.........
Click to expand...

Because it's not been ruled upon -so we can't know. What evidence we do have is that in 3 of the 4 cases addressing gay rights, he voted in favor of the expansion of gay rights.
 
Groucho said:
Should a straight person have done so as well? Should all black people recuse themselves if there is a question about racial discrimination? Should all women recuse themselves if the issue is about equal pay?

Somehow it never occurs to you people that maybe judges can make decisions based on the law. Perhaps you should question yourselves. It seems you would make decisions based on your own personal biases and therefore you assume everyone else would, too.
Click to expand...

If that were so activist judges would not be an issue. Sad thing is activist judges are a problem
 
Navy Pride said:
Is this your first time here my left wing friend.......Its been done a thousand times in DP.........
Click to expand...

Not answering the question here.

Why?
Present facts, don't give me crap about the "will of the people."

You're supposed to be trying to convince people that your argument is valid.
 
FilmFestGuy said:
And a Catholic should have recused himself because the Pope says gays are bad?

And a Mormon should have recused himself because her church provided like 75% of the funding for Prop 8?

Surely, and Evangelical would have to recuse himself because God knows they're pretty biased against the gays.

So, who - in your opinion - should have heard it?
Click to expand...

Posibly a panel of judges
 
UtahBill said:
Given that Mormons are a small minority everywhere but Utah, the results would have likely been the same. Believe it or not, the people of California don't look to Utah for their guidance on anything.
Click to expand...

Actually, Bill, the mormon church injected a HUGE amount of money into a last minute campaign full of deception and false accusations. Numbered among them were that gay people were trying to ban the words "mom and dad".
 
ptif219 said:
Posibly a panel of judges
Click to expand...

That's the next step. This is how it works. One judge, then panel of 3, then full panel, then SCOTUS. But first the "stay" order will follow that path - then the actual ruling will follow that path.
 
ptif219 said:
If that were so activist judges would not be an issue. Sad thing is activist judges are a problem
Click to expand...

We'll say it again
Activist Judges= A judge who makes a decision one does not agree with/ most of the time.

If you can read the ruling, and cite evidence that it's an "activist" ruling then post it. If you can't prove it(which you can't) then you should have a problem with this judges ruling.
 
jallman said:
I know. It's been the talk of the news here in CA how they preempted the judge's ruling, basically showing they had no intentions of following the court's decision.

Any word on whether or not the stay of verdict is being granted?
Click to expand...

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.
 
jallman said:
What's unavoidable is that people like you and various other assorted Rip Van Winkles in this society are either going to get with the times or lead a very, very angsty life from now until the time you join the Dodo bird in extinction.
Click to expand...

"people like you..."

LOL!

deal with the consequences of your VICTORY

november nears
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Not answering the question here.

Why?
Present facts, don't give me crap about the "will of the people."

You're supposed to be trying to convince people that your argument is valid.
Click to expand...

Asking for a rationale is not going to yield results. I suggest you save your energy.

The mouth foaming is exactly why prop 8 was defeated. There is no real reason to ban gay marriage in the year 2010. They've lost now and they'll eventually lose at the federal level for similar reasons. It's the same reason why DOMA was struck down not too long ago.
 
who's jailman?
 
ptif219 said:
Why this is about gays not straights.
Click to expand...

But if a gay judge cannot rule fairly on an issue involving gay marriage, there is no evidence a strait could either. Who do you think it is that oppose gay marriage...straits maybe?
 
ptif219 said:
If that were so activist judges would not be an issue. Sad thing is activist judges are a problem
Click to expand...

Exactly I don't know why we even vote on anything in this country anymore..........Just let judges decide everything...........
 
The Prof said:
"people like you..."

LOL!

deal with the consequences of your VICTORY

november nears
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. This won't destroy the Democrats, they'll still exist since all the rules are setup for the preservation of Republocrat rule. So maybe this all passes and some get chucked out. So what? It won't be long before people are pissed at the Republicans and vote back in Democrats. The entire thing merely teeter totters from one side to the other since we have no real competition in political parties. They may "feel consequences" now, but they'll be back in power later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom