• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proposition 8 Struck Down!!!

One of the great things about this country is the Bill of Rights and the way the founding fathers created a system that if ONE person could show that a law was unconstitutional it changed the law for everyone in the country. This country is not a majority rule democracy so suck it, Fundies.
 
Robert Prey said:
The voice of the some people, of the Common Law, Natural Law and Common Sense overruled by two deviant black robed oath takers The US Constitution. God, help us, but only temporarily.
Click to expand...

FTFY. Neither Common Law, Natural Law, nor Common Sense particularly disagrees with this decision. Don't confuse your hatred of gay people (or, if you prefer, "revulsion") as rationality.
 
Robert Prey said:
The voice of the people, of the Common Law, Natural Law and Common Sense overruled by two deviant black robed oath takers. God, help us, but only temporarily.
Click to expand...

What does it say about your god when "two deviant black robed oath takers" can so easily subvert his will? I mean, where's the fire and brimstone? The rain of frogs? How about a plague? Or at least a really bad head cold? I guess the old fella ain't what he used to be.

Also, what are you doing posting here? Shouldn't you be out somewhere protecting children from this abomination that has been unleashed upon the world? You know, since your god failed so miserably to do so.
 
Last edited:
crimresearch said:
Again, the court stated that *any* laws which discriminate without passing a balancing test are unconstitutional... that applies well outside of California.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit
Click to expand...

I read the decision.

And the "rational basis" test is nothing new. It's well-established law.

The Ninth Circuit panel simply applied that pre-existing law -- leaning heavily on one prior U.S. Supreme Court decision, Romer v. Evans -- to this specific scenario. The point is that this analysis is very specific to the situation at issue here, where a state constitutional amendment seeks to withdraw the right to marriage from those who already had it. It is not directly applicable to states that have never allowed gay marriage.

Upchurch said:
Which side? I think both side consider themselves "pro-marriage".

I know which side I consider to be correct about that (the side that allows for more people to get married), but I don't know who you are referring to.
Click to expand...

I meant the same thing as you.
 
Robert Prey said:
The voice of the people, of the Common Law, Natural Law and Common Sense overruled by two deviant black robed oath takers. God, help us, but only temporarily.
Click to expand...

I am so sorry that this upsets you. I would be more than happy to comfort you in your time of distress.
 
Robert Prey said:
The voice of the people, of the Common Law, Natural Law and Common Sense overruled by two deviant black robed oath takers. God, help us, but only temporarily.
Click to expand...

Oh no, save us from the oath takers! Does their fashion sense really make a difference?
 
Robert Prey said:
The voice of the people,
Click to expand...

Thank God the Constitution has mechanisms like the judicial branch to protect us from the idiot masses

of the Common Law,
Click to expand...

it is debateable where the Common Law stands on this

Natural Law
Click to expand...

Kill or be killed? I had no idea that was the basis for our legal system

and Common Sense
Click to expand...

That thing that told us the earth was flat and black people couldn't play baseball? Ya, we should refer to that more often

overruled by two deviant black robed oath takers.
Click to expand...

I like how you try and make judges apparel sound sinister

God, help us, but only temporarily.
Click to expand...

Ya, you love the Constitution so much, especially the stuff that ain't in it.
 
Robert Prey said:
The voice of the people, of the Common Law, Natural Law and Common Sense overruled by two deviant black robed oath takers. God, help us, but only temporarily.
Click to expand...
Voice of the people can't take away minority's civil rights, a fact evident in many prominent examples of case law related to civil rights legislation, discussed in detail throughout the ruling, ultimately determined an inadequate basis for restricting civil rights as fundamentally important as the right to marriage.

Common Law related to statutes expanding legal recognition for same-gender domestic partners, as well as the irrational distinction between same gender and opposite gender partners, received a tremendous amount of scrutiny in the actual ruling, serving as the basis for declaring Prop 8 unconstitutional.

Natural Law here seems to refer to refer to exactly nothing in the context its used, but its certainly a nice sounding expression, right?

Common Sense suggests that minorities have civil rights no matter the irrational prejudices of any number of others, that eliminating the rights of an entire class of people should actually serve some public good or state interest, points which Prop 8 proponents failed to establish, and subsequently caused them to lose their case.

0 for 4, ouch.
 
Last edited:
Link to a thread discussing related (and in some ways similar) issues in Iowa. The historical significance of the events in Iowa is notable. There was a political backlash and three sitting Iowa Supreme Court Justices were voted off the bench in 2010... but the ruling in which they joined is still in force.
 
Robert Prey said:
The voice of the people, of the Common Law, Natural Law and Common Sense overruled by two deviant black robed oath takers. God, help us, but only temporarily.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure my wife & I will be getting our notice to divorce from the gay overlords any day now & our edict to turn our son over to a gay couple a few days after he's born in March.
 
Back to the OP, the point is that the good guys are finally starting to show some wins on this. It doesn't matter how much money bigots throw at elections, ultimately the US Constitution is the law of the land and it should win out.
 
Lisa Simpson said:
Actually, since both Gov. Schwarzenegger and Gov. Brown have refused to take part, I would argue that the anti-gay marriage folk failed to prove their point, not the state.
Click to expand...
You could argue that. That isn't what they were referring to though.

The 'State interest' test includes things like 'for the common good'. Which is why the mere fact of the state passing a law wasn't sufficient.
 
I'd like to know what natural law this violates.
 
I am simply amused that some hard-line conservatives, who claim to live the constitution, like Robert, can make it sound so completely nefarious that a public official has taken an oath to uphold that same constitution, because by so doing, they issue a ruling that he disagrees with.

I mean, I know many liberals that were quite annoyed with the Citizen's United decision, but I have never heard a single one of them claim or even imply that the court overstepped its authority by doing so
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom