Page 10 of 35 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 347

Thread: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

  1. #91
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    As such, it can ONLY be a privilege, as rights are neither created by nor bestowed upon the people by the state.
    Oh please explain this logic to me.

    It contradicts reaility. The Supreme Court has established that marriage is a "fundamental right" under the United States Constitution.

    Perhaps you have heard of the Due Process Clause, which prohbits local and state governments of denying life, liberty, or property, withut taking certain steps. Marriage is fundamentally about life, liberty, and property.

    If you want to argue that "same sex marriage" is not a right, then that is one thing, but don't even try to argue that marriage in general is just some sort of privledge. That is neither historically, nor rationally corrrect.

  2. #92
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Fact of the matter is that Proposition 8 violated the Fourteenth Amendment, it wasn't going to pass the Supreme Court, and the state of California can't afford the luxury of wasting time on such petty issues right now.

    The state is facing bankruptcy thanks to the goonions that have controlled the state for decades, and the vultures are coming home to roost.
    It didn't violate the 14th. It was argued incorrectly by the state.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  3. #93
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,720

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Where is the positive grant of the right to own a firearm in the 2nd amendment?
    You see, that's the beauty of the Constitution. While other Constitutions specify what government can do, the Bill of Rights specify what government CANNOT do. The Second Amendment clearly says that the right to bear arms cannot be infringed upon, thereby holding up the right to bear arms as an intrinsic right. While many Constitutions are volumes in length, the US Constitution is short, and concise. This is because it takes a reverse approach to law, specifying what government is NOT allowed to do, instead of what it can do. What our forefathers did here was genius in it's simplicity.

    The short answer to your question is that the right to bear arms is expressly granted by the Second Amendment, because the government cannot take it away. You can't take away something that does not exist, can you?
    Last edited by danarhea; 09-06-10 at 11:18 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  4. #94
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    It didn't violate the 14th. It was argued incorrectly by the state.


    Tim-
    1: The case wasn't argued by the state, it was argued by Protect Marriage, since neither Schwarzenegger nor Brown would defend it.
    2. The federal court found it violated the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment, and nobody on this forum has yet to provide a decent case as to why that isn't true.

  5. #95
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    The short answer to your question is that the right to bear arms is expressly granted by the Second Amendment, because the government cannot take it away.
    This is silly. The language of the amendment grants nothing other than protection for something that pre-exists the Constitution.


    [/QUOTE]

  6. #96
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Oh please explain this logic to me.
    Not sure how I can be more clear that I already have been.
    Marriage, as a legal institution, is a creature of the state. It exists only because states passed laws creating it, and because those laws allow you to do it.
    If the state did not create those laws - or if they were repealed - marriage, as a legal institution, would not exist.
    This means that marriage, as a legal institution -must- be a privilege because states do not create or grant rights, thru legislation or otherwise.

    It contradicts reaility. The Supreme Court has established that marriage is a "fundamental right" under the United States Constitution.
    If the SCotUS says that 2+2=5, that just means they are wrong. The fact that the SCotUS may say it is a right doesnt - in fact, cannot - change the fact that it exists only because the state gives it to you, and is thus a privilege.

    Perhaps you have heard of the Due Process Clause, which prohbits local and state governments of denying life, liberty, or property, withut taking certain steps.
    I have. The due process clause doesnt change anything as it in no way forces the state to create the legal institution of marriage and cannot be used to keep the state from repealing those laws -- and it certainly doesnt change the fact that, as a creature of the state, the legal institution of marriage is a privilege that the state grants you.

  7. #97
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Oooook. I don't think you really understand how our Constitutional Republic works. In our system, the courts interpret the Constitution to determine what does and does not constitute a right that is protected by that Constitution. In the case of marriage, the Supreme Court determined it was a right because of the Due Process clause of the Constitution. In other words, the Supreme Court, as part of the state, recognized that marriage is a right protected by the Constitution.

    Now you can try to talk marriage down to a privilege in your own head, but our state recognizes marriage as a fundamental right. That is the reality.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 09-06-10 at 11:59 PM.

  8. #98
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Nice, homophobic remark.
    Classic racist response.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #99
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,720

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Councilman View Post
    So you're going to vote for or or back Brown, one of the wosrt Gov. in the history of the state. And your a Conservative?

    I say: (If" he's Brown flush him down)
    Did I say I supported Brown? No, I didn't. In fact, I stated already that I supported Schwartzeneggar in what he was doing. Now go try to put words in somebody else's mouth. That attack of yours was just plain lame, but I understand your reasoning. If you can't debate the issues, then attack the poster instead. That's really original.... NOT.
    Last edited by danarhea; 09-07-10 at 03:25 AM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  10. #100
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    When you sign a contract, if someone amends that contract... it's void.
    So, is the U.S. Constitution is amended, the President doesn't have to enforce its provision? That's silly...

    And the Current CA Constitution has been ruled unconstitutional -- They're American's first.
    But it remains a part of the CA Constitution and as such, he is constitutionally obligated to defend it... The supporters of Prop 8 should seek his impeachment in accordance with the CA Constitution...
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

Page 10 of 35 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... 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
  •