Ca Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

[Luissa]

No, I'm saying gay marriages are inferior to straight marriages. Too damn bad if you don't like my opinion on that either.

Actually, that isn't what you said the first time.
But that doesn't matter. Are you comparing all gay marriages to all straight marriages?

OH shut up. I have consistently said from long before I came to this board that I am pro gay marriage even though I personally find homosexuality sick. Go ahead and search my posts.

Touchy much? And I never said you were against it, I just wanted to know your logic. Plus you didn't say gay marriage is inferior, you implied gay people are inferior.

 

[Oddball]

The Segregationists lose again!

As the judicial oligarchs ignore the state's and people's right to make the laws under which they'll live.

 

[Liability]

Federal judge strikes down California's ban on same-sex marriage - San Jose Mercury News


ReprintPrint Email Font Resize
Federal judge strikes down California's ban on same-sex marriage

By Howard Mintz

[email protected]
Posted: 08/04/2010 01:51:23 PM PDT
Updated: 08/04/2010 01:56:00 PM PDT


A San Francisco federal judge today struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage, concluding that it tramples on the equal rights of gay and lesbian couples and setting the stage for an appeal that appears destined for the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a 136-page ruling, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker sided with two same-sex couples that challenged voter-approved Proposition 8, which embedded a ban on gay marriage in the California constitution and wiped out a prior California Supreme Court ruling that briefly legalized same-sex nuptials across the state. Walker ordered that Proposition 8 should be immediately voided, and same-sex couples be given the chance marry across California.

"Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians," the judge wrote. "The evidence shows conclusively that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason, a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite sex couples.
<more>

Yep...



peace...

If this goes to the SCOTUS then marriage equality may become the law of the land.

Doubtful. I wouldn't care too much, except that it shouldn't be judicially legislated.

 

[Big Fitz]

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.

America is becoming one of the sickest most perverted countries on Earth!. The people have voted that they did not want Homo marriage. Now we have a judge trying to force sodomy
on an entire state!?.The American Sodom and Gomorrah will be destroyed.!!

We have different ideas of what is sick and perverted. IMO hatred is sick and perverted.

FOR THE RECORD.

My issue here in this thread is ONLY in the judicial activism that has occurred.

I do not care if someone is homosexual. I have friends who are homosexual and love them very much.
Their problem is not with me and what my beliefs are, they are mine to live with and be respected by others as I try to respect theirs. YMMV
As long as they do not FORCE me to accept or tolerate something I am unwilling to accept, this will always remain so.
What they/you do in their own privacy is not my concern unless it harms another, and then that is only if I am forced to be involved by circumstance or law.

I desire the same level of courtesy and deference in my own life.
You don't have to agree or even like what I say, you just have to accept that it is my view and it has a right to exist.

If you hate gay people and wish them harm, do NOT try to 'help' out my point or posrep me or cheer me on.
I do not share your views and despise the hate your spread. I am your opponent.

I use harsh language to shock and strip away pretense and get through pleasant bullshit that is layered on the issues and shred frippery that gets us nowhere.
If you can't hack this, don't talk to me, and save yourself the headache.
I am an adult and expect some degree of slings arrows claws teeth and rhetorical landmines returned as well.

I hope I've made myself clear.

 

[Charles_Main]

Just in.
More to follow.

The will of the people thwarted again, and states rights to define marriage infringed. Yay Democrats.

 

[Luissa]

The Segregationists lose again!

As the judicial oligarchs ignore the state's and people's right to make the laws under which they'll live.

So you are alright with one group of people limiting the rights of another group of people?

 

[Oscar Wao]

But I'm sure judges were angels when the Chicago and DC gun bans were overturned, right?

 

[bodecea]

They are inferior, but who cares? Let them marry.

Or better yet, Hey government you have no right to regulate marriage in the first place, get out of the business. Meaning I can go ahead and marry my wife's sister also, I've had my eye on her for quite some time anyway.

Are you saying gay people are inferior?

That's what he said.

 

[Oscar Wao]

The Segregationists lose again!

As the judicial oligarchs ignore the state's and people's right to make the laws under which they'll live.

Sorry, friend, but in personal freedom matters such as these, the people should have no say.

 

[Luissa]

Just in.
More to follow.

The will of the people thwarted again, and states rights to define marriage infringed. Yay Democrats.

So the will of gay people does not count? You alright with certain people being able to decide what one group of people can do?

 

[ConHog]

Actually, that isn't what you said the first time.
But that doesn't matter. Are you comparing all gay marriages to all straight marriages?

OH shut up. I have consistently said from long before I came to this board that I am pro gay marriage even though I personally find homosexuality sick. Go ahead and search my posts.

Touchy much? And I never said you were against it, I just wanted to know your logic. Plus you didn't say gay marriage is inferior, you implied gay people are inferior.

No, you chose to read it that way. A normal person on the other hand understood that the topic at hand was gay marriage and so that when I said THEY are inferior, I meant gay marriages, not gay people.

 

[DavidS]

If this goes to the SCOTUS then marriage equality may become the law of the land.

That would be WONDERFUL

 

[bodecea]

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.

America is becoming one of the sickest most perverted countries on Earth!. The people have voted that they did not want Homo marriage. Now we have a judge trying to force sodomy
on an entire state!?.The American Sodom and Gomorrah will be destroyed.!!

That's right...FORCING sodomy on an entire state....remember to pick up those sodomy confirmation cards, everyone....and don't forget to attach the pics to prove that you have committed the judge determined quota of sodomy that everyone has to commit.

 

[Oddball]

The Segregationists lose again!

As the judicial oligarchs ignore the state's and people's right to make the laws under which they'll live.

So you are alright with one group of people limiting the rights of another group of people?

A marriage license -by the very definition of the term license- is a privilege, not a right.

Gays are not limited or precluded from entering into private marriage contracts, under the auspices of Article 1, Section 10, anywhere in the nation.

 

[ConHog]

Just in.
More to follow.

The will of the people thwarted again, and states rights to define marriage infringed. Yay Democrats.

So the will of gay people does not count? You alright with certain people being able to decide what one group of people can do?

How do you feel about speed limits?

 

[Charles_Main]

The Segregationists lose again!

As the judicial oligarchs ignore the state's and people's right to make the laws under which they'll live.

So you are alright with one group of people limiting the rights of another group of people?

Um no were for a States right to Define what marriage is. The gays can have civil unions, why must they insist on it being called marriage?

 

[Oddball]

The Segregationists lose again!

As the judicial oligarchs ignore the state's and people's right to make the laws under which they'll live.

Sorry, friend, but in personal freedom matters such as these, the people should have no say.

The terms "license" and "freedom" are mutually exclusive.

A license is the property of the person or state granting the privilege.

 

[bodecea]

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

Yes, I know you are dear but my statement had to do with the fact that California has paid for two elections that have cost the taxpayer dearly and both times the people voted no. Now that vote has been rendered inconsequential so stop pretending to let the people vote. and before you say anything I have NO problem with gay marriage, my problem is fake elections.

Actually, in both elections the people voted "yes".....


Just like people in other states in other times have voted "yes" to treating other minority Americans as second class citizens.

But you segregationists lose in the end.

 

[Charles_Main]

But I'm sure judges were angels when the Chicago and DC gun bans were overturned, right?

Um yeah because in those cases they sided with the CONSTITUTION, while in this case they are ignoring it, and infringing on states rights.

 

[bodecea]

The Segregationists lose again!

If you only had a brain.

So, you deny that this isn't a situation of the Yes on H8 people wanting "separate but equal"?