Ca Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

[Sky Dancer]

The state of California will make a hefty $490 million over the next three years since it legalized gay marriage.

 

[Oddball]

no it doesn't...there is no comparison...

i used a subject that is obviously a hot button issue to illustrate a point...you're the only one making a comparison between the two...

for your sensibilities though, change it to murder...the voters make murder legal

Another dumb comparison.

Murder is an act of aggression...What act of aggression is there in not issuing a state marriage license?

 

[Oddball]

The state of California will make a hefty $490 million over the next three years since it legalized gay marriage.

So, this is really all about throwing more money at the state and empowering bureaucrats and the judicial oligarchy.

Another moment of inadvertent honesty.

 

[WillowTree]

The state of California will make a hefty $490 million over the next three years since it legalized gay marriage.

hefty? they can piss that amount away in a week.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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>

It is my opinion that it should be made law that no liberal should ever sit on any bench as a judge.

 

[jillian]

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>

It is my opinion that it should be made law that no liberal should ever sit on any bench as a judge.

and it's my opinion that activist rightwingnuts shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the bench.

but that law would be unconstitutional.

so, guess you have to cope.

 

[Sky Dancer]

And to think heterosexuals sit on the bench!

 

[Sky Dancer]

The state of California will make a hefty $490 million over the next three years since it legalized gay marriage.

So, this is really all about throwing more money at the state and empowering bureaucrats and the judicial oligarchy.

Another moment of inadvertent honesty.

It's a nice side benefit. I'm just happy to still be married.

 

[Oddball]

The state of California will make a hefty $490 million over the next three years since it legalized gay marriage.

So, this is really all about throwing more money at the state and empowering bureaucrats and the judicial oligarchy.

Another moment of inadvertent honesty.

It's a nice side benefit. I'm just happy to still be married.

Benefit schmenefit...It'll make a state already top heavy with bureaucracy and clogged courts even more so.

 

[Sky Dancer]

So, this is really all about throwing more money at the state and empowering bureaucrats and the judicial oligarchy.

Another moment of inadvertent honesty.

It's a nice side benefit. I'm just happy to still be married.

Benefit schmenefit...It'll make a state already top heavy with bureaucracy and clogged courts even more so.

It will bring in more revenue. We sure need it.

 

[Oddball]

And to think heterosexuals sit on the bench!

Yeah...Far leftist oligarch heteros, who can't wait for cases like this so they can rule by decree.

 

[B. Kidd]

I think you've got immigration on the brain.

I pay x amt. of dollars to 'Sky Dancer' to marry 'Maria' from Ensenada. 'Maria' gets a green card.
I charge 'Maria' xxxxxxx amt. of dollars to get married here.
All 'Maria' needs to get married in Las Vegas, is 'Sky Dancer' present at their wedding at B. Kidd's 'Infinite Hearts' wedding chapel. Under NV. law, 'Maria' benefits from no waiting period, no blood tests, and basic I.D. requirements being the same for U.S. citizens as non-U.S. citizens. At the least, 'Maria' only needs a foreign-born birth certificate, and $60.00 to pay to Clark County, (of course after B. Kidd gets paid). Plus B. Kidd gives the newlyweds free 'strap-ons' and flavored gel assortments for a bliss filled honeymoon.
Since NV. has 35 different reasons to get an annulment with no problem, their wedding gets annuled and Maria disappears into the vast expanse of the U.S..
Since 'Sky Dancer' gets paid well for being on B. Kidd's lonely hearts payroll (along with other U.S. citizens who can sponsor brides to be), I recycle her through the same 'legal' charade for another immigrant, and another, and another.......

Yeah, I and others SHOULD NOT have immigration on the brain.
But please, don't let me interfere with your celebration today.

 

[Oddball]

It's a nice side benefit. I'm just happy to still be married.

Benefit schmenefit...It'll make a state already top heavy with bureaucracy and clogged courts even more so.

It will bring in more revenue. We sure need it.

Revenue which will be spent even before it's banked.

If it's one thing Fornicalia politicians know how to do, it's spend money like it grows in the Central Valley.

 

[Sky Dancer]

And to think heterosexuals sit on the bench!

Yeah...Far leftist oligarch heteros, who can't wait for cases like this so they can rule by decree.

Grouchy, ain't ya?

 

[Oddball]

Not in the least...Just calling it like I see it.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Cynical view.

 

[Oddball]

I'm always cynical when it comes to overreaching political hacks and judicial despots.

 

[ConHog]

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>

It is my opinion that it should be made law that no liberal should ever sit on any bench as a judge.

and it's my opinion that activist rightwingnuts shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the bench.

but that law would be unconstitutional.

so, guess you have to cope.

It is MY opinion that the loons on BOTH sides should be nowhere near an election booth, let alone a judge's gavel. Totally unconstitutional, but I believe a voting exam is in order, and the dumbshits from EITHER side should be weeded out if tge decision making process.

On the left. Get over yourselves, you have NO constitutionally guaranteed right to marry , NONE whatsoever, so a law that limits who a piece of paper can be issued to can NOT be unconstitutional. Does being liberal really mean being totally retarded and just making things up?

On the right, shut up for God's sakes, no one should be denied a privilege of citizenship based on a sin (and blah no lefite it isn't a sin responses here ok , I'm not fucking talking to you in this paragraph.) Since when did being conservative mean not having a goddamn lick of compassion or common sense? Jesus just let them get married, does it lessen your own marriage at all? No it doesn't.

In short, both sides are being titty babies about this entire issue, as if this issue is unique in that.

 

[Big Fitz]

Ad hominem.

Oh grow up. If you can't play hard ball, find another forum. Try Hannity. They treat libs with kid gloves there because they can't hack being forced to stand equally.

Saying "your personal stake invalidates your opinion" is very much ad hominem.

In regards to being an objective commentator it sure as hell does!

Lay off the dope man.

 

[Ravi]

A lot of silly arguments on this thread. Perhaps the silliest one of all is that since we must get a license to marry it is okay to refuse any two citizens a license simply because they are gay.

What next? No gays granted driver's licenses or hunting licenses?