Ca Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

[hjmick]

Whatever.

Not a lot of enthusiam, LOL. I hope it happens in my lifetime. I'm thinking of the lesbian couple, Del Martin and Phyllis Lyons who were married just before Prop *.

They'd been together for 50 years and Del died just before marriage equality was defeated again.

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Oppostion to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

 

[Chris]

Whatever.

Not a lot of enthusiam, LOL. I hope it happens in my lifetime. I'm thinking of the lesbian couple, Del Martin and Phyllis Lyons who were married just before Prop *.

They'd been together for 50 years and Del died just before marriage equality was defeated again.

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Oppostion to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

Too funny...

 

[Sky Dancer]

Whatever.

Not a lot of enthusiam, LOL. I hope it happens in my lifetime. I'm thinking of the lesbian couple, Del Martin and Phyllis Lyons who were married just before Prop *.

They'd been together for 50 years and Del died just before marriage equality was defeated again.

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Oppostion to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

It means alot to me. I waited 25 years to be able to marry. I was married for just a few weeks and it was reversed.

The court grandfathered us all in, so I continue to be married.

It's made a big difference in my life. And it's made alot of people who know me and my partner very happy.

 

[Father Time]

Oh who didn't see this coming?

"Fuck the will of the people, we fascists jerkoffs want the right to force our perversions on everyone we damn well please. Our rights matter, you straights fucking suck if you disagree and shouldn't be allowed to have rights!"

Way to feed homo-hatred, judge! Great way to assure violence will probably go up in the future if this stands.

So the judge is responsible for bigots attacking people because he pissed them off?

Wow so I guess we can blame the brown ruling everytime there's racial violence in a public school.

And how exactly is gay marriage taking away anyone's rights or forcing you to do anything?

 

[Father Time]

The public voted overwhelmingly for no gay marriage. A judge overturned this for activists who aren't content with just working out contractual agreements on the side like rational people. Therefore you have taken away the will of the people and supplanted it with activist special interest.

Yes if they have a ruling you disagree with they must be activist. The majority do not have a right to pass unconstitutional laws.

It will be interesting IF it turns out SCOTUS bans gay marriage nation wide though.

They can't do that.

 

[Sky Dancer]

It's sure been a roller coaster ride for someone who has lived through this.

 

[Big Fitz]

The public voted overwhelmingly for no gay marriage. A judge overturned this for activists who aren't content with just working out contractual agreements on the side like rational people. Therefore you have taken away the will of the people and supplanted it with activist special interest. People don't LIKE that when their vote is nullified by an asshole judge looking play social engineer because they feel entitled to.

It will be interesting IF it turns out SCOTUS bans gay marriage nation wide though. Willing to accept THAT decision too? The majority of Americans, particularly minorities would rejoice their will would matter.

if the public voted overwhelmingly against equal rights for Blacks would you be so ready to support it?

Civil rights are not to be voted on.

Really? So you're saying the people have no right to vote directly on the laws that govern their lives by direct referendum? Huh. So I guess we're really ruled by judges who aren't elected then because they decide what the rules mean and who can make them as long as they agree. Interesting. So much for your faith in direct democracy. I guess it only matters when it agrees with you.

oh... and one small fallacy to point out. Gay 'rights' are not Civil Rights, it's a behavior and/or lifestyle choice, not a state of existence like skin color is. (and don't bother trying to advocate otherwise to me, I don't give a fuck what you believe. It's not the point of this thread.)

The issue is one of ignoring the will of the people for an activist minority. BTW, if civil rights is not to be voted on, I guess there's no right to vote on many other 'rights' too, like property rights so zoning is out of line (now I can put my oil derrick in my back yard in the city and dog fighting pit in the garage), or behavior rights, so I can put my porn shop next to your church and sell to your kids, or health rights, welcome back smoking in movie theaters and bye bye drinking age!

You sure on this attitude? All sorts of referendum voted ordinances out there that can be done away with. Please... let's go back to life before the temperance movement existed. That'll be FUN!

 

[WillowTree]

Just in.
More to follow.

California just needs to cease and desist in letting the people vote. It's a ridiculous waste of taxpayers money having elections.

 

[Sky Dancer]

This was a court ruling Willow. It's one I'm very happy with.

 

[Big Fitz]

The public voted overwhelmingly for no gay marriage. A judge overturned this for activists who aren't content with just working out contractual agreements on the side like rational people. Therefore you have taken away the will of the people and supplanted it with activist special interest.

Yes if they have a ruling you disagree with they must be activist. The majority do not have a right to pass unconstitutional laws.

It will be interesting IF it turns out SCOTUS bans gay marriage nation wide though.

They can't do that.

Why? Cause you disagree with it? They stopped states from banning abortion. Nothing says they couldn't reverse it. Jim Crow forced segregation on us. Don't even try to say they can't.

Who's the activist here? I'm saying this is judicial activism and it is out of line. You can't get a better representation than by going directly to the people, and bypassing the party system of elites.

The California constitution made it constitutional. That is something the judges cannnot change. But activists sure try to twist what the meaning of 'is' is.

 

[Father Time]

The public voted overwhelmingly for no gay marriage. A judge overturned this for activists who aren't content with just working out contractual agreements on the side like rational people. Therefore you have taken away the will of the people and supplanted it with activist special interest. People don't LIKE that when their vote is nullified by an asshole judge looking play social engineer because they feel entitled to.

It will be interesting IF it turns out SCOTUS bans gay marriage nation wide though. Willing to accept THAT decision too? The majority of Americans, particularly minorities would rejoice their will would matter.

if the public voted overwhelmingly against equal rights for Blacks would you be so ready to support it?

Civil rights are not to be voted on.

Really? So you're saying the people have no right to vote directly on the laws that govern their lives by direct referendum?

Is it possible for you to argue without using straw men?

Huh. So I guess we're really ruled by judges who aren't elected then because they decide what the rules mean and who can make them as long as they agree. Interesting. So much for your faith in direct democracy. I guess it only matters when it agrees with you.

We are a republic with limits on what laws can be passed.

oh... and one small fallacy to point out. Gay 'rights' are not Civil Rights, it's a behavior and/or lifestyle choice, not a state of existence like skin color is. (and don't bother trying to advocate otherwise to me, I don't give a fuck what you believe. It's not the point of this thread.)

"No I'm right on this and don't you dare try to contradict me because I won't listen."

How childish.

The issue is one of ignoring the will of the people for an activist minority.

Cry Moar. Voter approved laws have been struck down as unconstitutional all the time. It's nothing new.

BTW, if civil rights is not to be voted on, I guess there's no right to vote on many other 'rights' too, like property rights so zoning is out of line (now I can put my oil derrick in my back yard in the city and dog fighting pit in the garage), or behavior rights, so I can put my porn shop next to your church and sell to your kids,

Behavior and property rights are not absolute. But it'd sure be nice not to have those "can't build next to a church" laws.

You sure on this attitude? All sorts of referendum voted ordinances out there that can be done away with.

Most of your slippery slope conclusions do not violate the constitution (although I contend that the zoning rules to protect churches do).

 

[skookerasbil]

California Federal Judge rules this way? What a shocker!!!!


gay

 

[Big Fitz]

Not a lot of enthusiam, LOL. I hope it happens in my lifetime. I'm thinking of the lesbian couple, Del Martin and Phyllis Lyons who were married just before Prop *.

They'd been together for 50 years and Del died just before marriage equality was defeated again.

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Oppostion to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

It means alot to me. I waited 25 years to be able to marry. I was married for just a few weeks and it was reversed.

The court grandfathered us all in, so I continue to be married.

It's made a big difference in my life. And it's made alot of people who know me and my partner very happy.

There we go, bias due to personal gain. Invalidates your whole stance as an honest broker. I have nothing to gain other than my right as an individual to have my vote count and not be reversed by some dickfur in a black robe.

 

[hjmick]

Not a lot of enthusiam, LOL. I hope it happens in my lifetime. I'm thinking of the lesbian couple, Del Martin and Phyllis Lyons who were married just before Prop *.

They'd been together for 50 years and Del died just before marriage equality was defeated again.

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Opposition to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

It means alot to me. I waited 25 years to be able to marry. I was married for just a few weeks and it was reversed.

The court grandfathered us all in, so I continue to be married.

It's made a big difference in my life. And it's made alot of people who know me and my partner very happy.

I understand and respect that, and I congratulate you and your partner on your union as well as this legal victory. It's been a long time coming. Please do not think my attitude flippant or dismissive. I have just never understood the amount of opposition on the topic. Especially in this day and age. I have always thought that if a person opposed to gay marriage were to stop and look at the big picture, look at all the things that are really fucked up and needed to be addressed, that would, or should be, at the bottom of their list.

Now I'm going to be called a liberal... Shit...

 

[Steerpike]

The Supreme Court can't ban marriage nationwide. They could rule that a ban is Constitutional and leave it to the States to ban or not ban.

People can vote by referendum, but they can't vote on fundamental Constitutional issues (for example, you couldn't vote to eliminate first amendment protections).

 

[Sky Dancer]

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Oppostion to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

It means alot to me. I waited 25 years to be able to marry. I was married for just a few weeks and it was reversed.

The court grandfathered us all in, so I continue to be married.

It's made a big difference in my life. And it's made alot of people who know me and my partner very happy.

There we go, bias due to personal gain. Invalidates your whole stance as an honest broker. I have nothing to gain other than my right as an individual to have my vote count and not be reversed by some dickfur in a black robe.

You bet I have a personal stake in marriage equality. I'm dancing for joy.

 

[Father Time]

The public voted overwhelmingly for no gay marriage. A judge overturned this for activists who aren't content with just working out contractual agreements on the side like rational people. Therefore you have taken away the will of the people and supplanted it with activist special interest.

Yes if they have a ruling you disagree with they must be activist. The majority do not have a right to pass unconstitutional laws.

It will be interesting IF it turns out SCOTUS bans gay marriage nation wide though.

They can't do that.

Why? Cause you disagree with it?

Cause there is nothing in the constitution they can use to ban them.

Jim Crow forced segregation on us. Don't even try to say they can't.

Jim crow were laws passed through state legislatures not by the court.

The California constitution made it constitutional. That is something the judges cannnot change. But activists sure try to twist what the meaning of 'is' is.

And the judge is saying it violates the federal constitution which trumps state constitutions AND 52% majority votes.

 

[bodecea]

The Segregationists lose again!

 

[Father Time]

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Oppostion to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

It means alot to me. I waited 25 years to be able to marry. I was married for just a few weeks and it was reversed.

The court grandfathered us all in, so I continue to be married.

It's made a big difference in my life. And it's made alot of people who know me and my partner very happy.

There we go, bias due to personal gain. Invalidates your whole stance as an honest broker. I have nothing to gain other than my right as an individual to have my vote count and not be reversed by some dickfur in a black robe.

Ad hominem.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I don't know that it's a lack of enthusiasm, I'm just kind of non-plussed about the decision. I pretty much expected the decision to go this way. Opposition to gay marriage never made much sense to me, why shouldn't everyone have the right to be as miserable as so many married couples seem to be? And in-laws? Heheheheh....

It means alot to me. I waited 25 years to be able to marry. I was married for just a few weeks and it was reversed.

The court grandfathered us all in, so I continue to be married.

It's made a big difference in my life. And it's made alot of people who know me and my partner very happy.

I understand and respect that, and I congratulate you and your partner on your union as well as this legal victory. It's been a long time coming. Please do not think my attitude flippant or dismissive. I have just never understood the amount of opposition on the topic. Especially in this day and age. I have always thought that if a person opposed to gay marriage were to stop and look at the big picture, look at all the things that are really fucked up and needed to be addressed, that would, or should be, at the bottom of their list.

Now I'm going to called a liberal... Shit...

Actually, plenty of conservatives favor marriage equality. Don't worry about the liberal label. Some of us actually wear it proudly.

And thanks for the well wishes.