The Evidence Supporting Prop 8 As Law In California Becomes Overwhelming

[WorldWatcher]

Anti-SSCM is winning? It's "marching back"?


Sorry, SSCM is expanding and it's the states that are doing it.


>>>>

...lol...you should change your name from "Worldwatcher" to "Statewatcher". As the states learn the true sedition of what's been going on with this gay marriage thing, especially in California where gay leaders [Leno] and their advocates-in-crime in high places are strong-arming people away from their protected rights to consensus on the matter.

When voters of various states learn that the "you have no choice but to approve gay marriage" state of affairs in California is as seditious as it factually is, well...voters tend to not like to hear the words "you have to or else".

Yes, just change your name to "Statewatcher" because the unchecked momentum of the gay-steamroller is about to hit a rut in the middle of the road. That rut is called "the DOMA Decision".

#1 - The DOMA decision has no bearing on the states, that was about Federal law and states that said "Yes", it has nothing to do with States that say "No". That will be another future case. However I expect the SCOTUS to stay as far away from that question until over half the states have approved SSCM, I think now the count is 16. Pretty good since less then 10-years ago the count was "0".

#2 - I see you are down to attempted personal insults now. Since your legal stretching's are a loosing attempt at claiming some sort of "victory" that doesn't exist have been shown to be wrong I guess that's all you've got left.


Have fun, you are not going to enjoy the next 10 years or so as more and more states recognize Marriage Equality.


>>>>

 

[Silhouette]

#1 - The DOMA decision has no bearing on the states, that was about Federal law and states that said "Yes", it has nothing to do with States that say "No". That will be another future case. However I expect the SCOTUS to stay as far away from that question until over half the states have approved SSCM, I think now the count is 16. Pretty good since less then 10-years ago the count was "0".

#2 - I see you are down to attempted personal insults now. Since your legal stretching's are a loosing attempt at claiming some sort of "victory" that doesn't exist have been shown to be wrong I guess that's all you've got left.


Have fun, you are not going to enjoy the next 10 years or so as more and more states recognize Marriage Equality.


>>>>

Read the very first post in this thread. In it, you will find direct quotes from the DOMA Decision that talk directly about states rights and involvment in the legitimizing of so-called gay marriage. Over and over and over in DOMA the discussion centers around why the fed should stay out of it PRECISELY BECAUSE IT IS A STATE ISSUE TO DECIDE. And they didn't even stop there. They went on to say that not only must states decide on this new and unusual type of "marriage", but that that decision must come from a wide-swath/majority in consensus on the matter.

Here is the kernel of what the DOMA Decision found, and is binding:

1. That states decide the question of gay marriage each one for themselves, via consensus

2. That once that decision is made, the fed has to abide by it in certain applications.

3. In any question regarding whether or not a marriage is legitimate, the states' consensus intrinsic and different as each one may be, trump the fed.

4. [Implied, and if tested, applicable:] That gay marriage is not a fast and solid right protected anywhere in the US from a majority consensus and, therefore,

5. [Implied, and if tested, applicable: ] Proposition 8 is a valid and enforceable law.

Of course, you can keep your head in the sand and in full denial on this one, but closing your eyes as your steamroller careens towards the chasm in the road is not going to soften the blow. There are lawyers out there stropping their knives on behalf of those who oppose this "new and unusual" agenda to dismantle marriage. I can guarantee you they can read and understand why SCOTUS found that States have a right to consensus on gay marriage and how that consensus is protected "in the way the Framers of the Constitution intended"...

 

[WorldWatcher]

#1 - The DOMA decision has no bearing on the states, that was about Federal law and states that said "Yes", it has nothing to do with States that say "No". That will be another future case. However I expect the SCOTUS to stay as far away from that question until over half the states have approved SSCM, I think now the count is 16. Pretty good since less then 10-years ago the count was "0".

#2 - I see you are down to attempted personal insults now. Since your legal stretching's are a loosing attempt at claiming some sort of "victory" that doesn't exist have been shown to be wrong I guess that's all you've got left.


Have fun, you are not going to enjoy the next 10 years or so as more and more states recognize Marriage Equality.


>>>>

Read the very first post in this thread. In it, you will find direct quotes from the DOMA Decision that talk directly about states rights and involvment in the legitimizing of so-called gay marriage. Over and over and over in DOMA the discussion centers around why the fed should stay out of it PRECISELY BECAUSE IT IS A STATE ISSUE TO DECIDE. And they didn't even stop there. They went on to say that not only must states decide on this new and unusual type of "marriage", but that that decision must come from a wide-swath/majority in consensus on the matter.

Of course, you can keep your head in the sand and in full denial on this one, but closing your eyes as your steamroller careens towards the chasm in the road is not going to soften the blow. There are lawyers out there carving their knives for those who oppose this "new and unusual" agenda to dismantle marriage. I can guarantee you they can read and understand why SCOTUS found that States have a right to consensus on gay marriage and how that consensus is protected "in the way the Framers of the Constitution intended"...

And this thread in it's entirety has shown that you cherry picked a snippet from one case that applies to Federal Law concerning a State that said "yes" and are trying to apply to to state laws that say no when the DOMA case had no bearing on state laws at all.

You can hem and haw all day long but at the end of the day:

1. Prop 8 was found to be unconstitutional by the District Court.

2. The SCOTUS dismissed the appeal, vacating the 9th Circuit Court Ruling and letting the District Courts ruling to remain the governing ruling on the mater.

3. The State of California recognizes the validity of the decision.

4. Every other state that recognizes SSCM recognizes the validity of the decision and as new states are added to that list they recognize those Civil Marriages as valid.

5. The Federal government now recognizes SSCMs performed in California as valid.

6. The California Supreme Court recognizes the validity of the decision and refused to stay the resumption of SSCM's.

7. The 9th Circuit Court recognized the validity of the decision and refused to stay the resumption of SSCM's.

8. Finally the SCOTUS recognized that what they intended was to be allowed to happen. If there was this big "mistake" as to interpretation, the final nail in the coffin is that an appeal to the SCOTUS was made and the SCOTUS rejected it instead of issuing a stay on the resumption of SSCMs. If the DOMA case was to be interpreted as you claim, then the SCOTUS would have issued (a) a temporary stay pending further court action, or (b) a permanent injunction enjoining California from resuming SSCMs. They did neither.​

As a matter of fact I can think of only one person in the country that thinks the SCOTUS upheld Prop 8 and that SSCMs are illegal in California, and that individual is wrong.



>>>>

 

[Silhouette]

see below:

1. Prop 8 was found to be unconstitutional by the District Court.

The district court is inferior & legally subordinate to the SCOTUS and all Its Decisions. You know that...

2. The SCOTUS dismissed the appeal, vacating the 9th Circuit Court Ruling and letting the District Courts ruling to remain the governing ruling on the mater.

Only inasmuch as it comes into compliance with its superior, the SCOTUS. If such a lower ruling stands in direct conflict with a higher Ruling, it is immediately defunct. The Justices knew this when they wrote their Decision on Prop 8. That's why they vacated, to avoid political backlash as the reality of what they did in DOMA slowly would sink in. DOMA invalidates the lower ruling in Prop 8. Sorry to be the one to break the news to you. Stay tuned because you're going to hear more about that in the coming months...

3. The State of California recognizes the validity of the decision.

The State of California and all those its constitution rules over, has in its preamble an expression of subordination to the US Constitution and by extension, all the interpretations of it rendered by the SCOTUS. Therefore, refer back to #2 here. The State has been Overruled as to its rogue leaders' seditious position on Prop 8..

4. Every other state that recognizes SSCM recognizes the validity of the decision.

Only if that recognition is compliant with its internal broad-swath consensus as the language in DOMA clearly indicates as the arena it recognizes as legally able to condone so called "gay marriage". Challenges in the states where gay marriage was rammed through legislatures or activist judges, without the permission in consensus of the governed, will reverse any progress the Agenda has made there.

5. The California Supreme Court recognizes the validity of the decision and refused to stay the resumption of SSCM's.

Yes, done by rogue officials in violation of their own Constitution and in contempt of the Highest Court in the land; and to the extermination of some 7 million of their citizens' constitutional-rights to consensus on the matter. Stay tuned because this one isn't dead and buried.

6. The 9th Circuit Court recognized the validity of the decision and refused to stay the resumption of SSCM's.

The 9th Circuit is inferior to the SCOTUS. Anyone who forces County Clerks through coercion or duress to validate gay marriage is currently in contempt of the US Supreme Court.

7. Finally the SCOTUS recognized that what they intended was to be allowed to happen. If there was this big "mistake" as to interpretation, the final nail in the coffin is that an appeal to the SCOTUS was made and the SCOTUS rejected it instead of issuing a stay on the resumption of SSCMs. If the DOMA case was to be interpreted as you claim, then the SCOTUS would have issued (a) a temporary stay pending further court action, or (b) a permanent injunction enjoining California from resuming SSCMs. They did neither.

Ah, well there's the rub. It's not that the plea wasn't right; just the timing was off a little. Look for a revival and suits brought on good grounds that won't be rejected in the very near future. I'd say, pretty much throughout 2014. We will refer back to this post when they begin getting filed....

 

[WorldWatcher]

The district court is inferior & legally subordinate to the SCOTUS and all Its Decisions. You know that...

Yes I do. The SCOTUS in the Prop 8 case did not vacate the District Court Judges ruling that it was unconstitutional, therefore it is the governing ruling for the State of California.

If the intent of DOMA case had been to overturn Prop 8, then the SCOTUS would not have denied the petition to issue a stay that would have prevented SSCMs from resuming. The fact is that they denied the peition and allowed SSCMs to resume. That shows that they had no intent of DOMA decision being applied to anyone other than the federal government.

Ah, well there's the rub. It's not that the plea wasn't right; just the timing was off a little. Look for a revival and suits brought on good grounds that won't be rejected in the very near future. I'd say, pretty much throughout 2014. We will refer back to this post when they begin getting filed....

Prop 8 is dead. There will not be any "revival" suits. The SCOTUS ruled in the case, it's done. California isn't going to "revive" the suit. And not other state or organization has the standing to try to bring Prop 8 back to the SCOTUS. And in years down the road if a new Governor/AG were to try the case would not be accepted because it lacked "timeliness" (the legal principal that a case must be filed within specified timeliness to be addressed).


Face it, SSCMs are legal in California.


>>>>

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And now the states are beginning the slow march pushing back. They are lining up to say "you're not going to strip OUR state's citizens' rights to consensus on gay marriage like you are trying to do in California..or by forcing it through federal channels like the military. They're drawing a line in the sand and forcing SCOTUS to clarify DOMA.

And they will.....they will...

This doesn’t make any sense.

Residents of a given state are first and foremost citizens of the United States, their civil liberties safeguarded by the Federal Constitution, where its case law is the law of the land.

When residents of a given state enact a measure offensive to the Constitution, such as Proposition 8, the Constitution authorizes the courts to invalidate those laws. The invalidation of an un-Constitutional law does not ‘strip’ any person of any ‘right,’ as no such privilege existed to begin with.

 

[Silhouette]

Residents of a given state are first and foremost citizens of the United States, their civil liberties safeguarded by the Federal Constitution, where its case law is the law of the land.

When residents of a given state enact a measure offensive to the Constitution, such as Proposition 8, the Constitution authorizes the courts to invalidate those laws. The invalidation of an un-Constitutional law does not ‘strip’ any person of any ‘right,’ as no such privilege existed to begin with.

The measure has to be actually offensive to the Constitution. And as reality has it, the DENIAL OF ENFORCEMENT of the Will of the People of CA in Prop 8 is the specified violation of constitutional rights, as found in DOMA. While the hoped-for "violation" of the "rights" gays claim to have is nothing but hot air. There's nothing in DOMA or Prop 8, June 2013 that supports so-called gay marriage as a constitutional right. Quite the opposite in fact; where over and again in DOMA SCOTUS refers to gay marriage as only "allowed" "in some states" and is subject to wide-swath weigh in by the Governed in their respecitive states. That wide-swath weigh in as the Will of consensus, constitutionally-guaranteed in the matter, commonly known as Prop 8 in California, is being categorically violated by an oligarchy there.

So Prop 8 is not offensive to the Constitution while suppressing it expressly is a violation of civil rights; and a suppression of democracy itself, and a suppression of the California state initiative system. That is a system that was hard fought for and put in place PRECISELY to promote the purest form of democracy and remove the exact type of oligarchy threat that Senator Leno, Governor Brown and AG Harris have siezed Rule through.

 

[Silhouette]

The democrats, as 2014 approaches, had better wake up and smell the wafts of outrage coming from the middle and the GOP on this willful erosion of democracy in California. Because if you think for one minute it has escaped their attention and they will just abide and sit by while 7 million potential voters in the largest electorial-state have their opposition to gay marriage and their rights to that opposition ripped away from them by what is essentially a democrat-cabal, think again.

All those hispanics, 99% of them catholic. The last Pope just dethroned by a gay-cabal trying to destroy religion from the inside out.... Be afraid. Be very afraid. The Rainbow Steamroller is heading towards a chasm in the road and it's going to take down its champions with it: the democratic party.

Goodbye 2014. Mark my words. You read it here first.

 

[dcraelin]

The democrats, as 2014 approaches, had better wake up and smell the wafts of outrage coming from the middle and the GOP on this willful erosion of democracy in California. Because if you think for one minute it has escaped their attention and they will just abide and sit by while 7 million potential voters in the largest electorial-state have their opposition to gay marriage and their rights to that opposition ripped away from them by what is essentially a democrat-cabal, think again.

All those hispanics, 99% of them catholic. The last Pope just dethroned by a gay-cabal trying to destroy religion from the inside out.... Be afraid. Be very afraid. The Rainbow Steamroller is heading towards a chasm in the road and it's going to take down its champions with it: the democratic party.

Goodbye 2014. Mark my words. You read it here first.

It is amazing how the corporate shills at MSNBC keep advising Republicans to reach out to Hispanics and blacks. Both populations are generally socially conservative and one way to reach out would be to focus on this issue. I remember an analysis of the California prop 8 vote and the reason given was higher turn-out from blacks due to Obama being on the ticket at the same time.

 

[Silhouette]

The democrats, as 2014 approaches, had better wake up and smell the wafts of outrage coming from the middle and the GOP on this willful erosion of democracy in California. Because if you think for one minute it has escaped their attention and they will just abide and sit by while 7 million potential voters in the largest electorial-state have their opposition to gay marriage and their rights to that opposition ripped away from them by what is essentially a democrat-cabal, think again.

All those hispanics, 99% of them catholic. The last Pope just dethroned by a gay-cabal trying to destroy religion from the inside out.... Be afraid. Be very afraid. The Rainbow Steamroller is heading towards a chasm in the road and it's going to take down its champions with it: the democratic party.

Goodbye 2014. Mark my words. You read it here first.

It is amazing how the corporate shills at MSNBC keep advising Republicans to reach out to Hispanics and blacks. Both populations are generally socially conservative and one way to reach out would be to focus on this issue. I remember an analysis of the California prop 8 vote and the reason given was higher turn-out from blacks due to Obama being on the ticket at the same time.

Right. If they just and only just grabbed the gay issue, the GOP could run over home plate and do a victory dance on not just hispanics and blacks but scores and scores of underreported white Clinton democrats as well.

Even among "supporters" of gay marriage in the middle, their support is lukewarm at best, and based on believing that's what the herd is thinking. If you merely publish information that casts a seedy light on the gay agenda to these middle folks, they'll change their allegiance in a heartbeat.

That's why I've always brought up polygamy as being purposefully left out of the "LGBT" brand. Because if those millions of middle-aisle, lukewarm supporters [large percentage married women] figured out that gay marriage legally = polygamy, the gig is up. Game over. Gay marriage is dead in the water.

It's so easy it's like child's play. And that's what should be making democratic strategists very, very nervous for 2014. Quite literally, the tiny militant gay faction of the democratic party is asking it to commit political suicide to keep backing AG Harris, Gov Brown and Sen. Leno in California. This fiasco is going to be sculpted to a head in the very near future. And when that sculpting happens, the democrats will be left with their tongue's wagging..."duh...duh...um...der...uh.." And that will probably be just around *checks wristwatch* mid to late October, 2014... Goodbye universal healthcare. Goodbye curbs on fracking. Goodbye, green energy. Goodbye minimum living wages. Goodbye any other dem platform you can think of....

& Hello repeal of the repeal of DADT [ironically]. Hello fracking and burning tap water near you. Hello growing debt. Hello new wars in the ME. Hello rollback of Roe v Wade....all so that two people of the same gender can get the forced-sanction of society to pretend they are man and wife. I'd say it would be cheaper for dems to overhaul the American Psychological Association's Governing Board & simply pad the mental health budgets of the states under new non-political management and call it good. When you step back and look at the big picture for what it really is and what it means.

 

[Silhouette]

When you've got a problem in your party's strategy and platform, you need to honestly and thoroughly trace it back to its roots. There are no rewards for chickens. No prizes for the weak and dishonest. No brass ring for stupid.

 

[J.E.D]

Silhouette has 202 posts - a good 95% of which are in this one thread.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Silly is a one-note troll...basically, she is a human spambot.

 

[J.E.D]

Human spam-bot?.....

 

[Silhouette]

When lucid debate fails, there's always ad hominems..lol.. You guys know this is an important topic to me. When our family friend died from AIDS from being "gay" after being manufactured that way by a child molestor and left confused, still loving women but only able to become aroused around men, I made it a life mission to educate people about what my experience with "gay" really is.

Sorry if it puts a monkey wrench in your "gay is totally OK" platform. Gay isn't totally OK. Not in my book and not from what I've seen.

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

 

[g5000]

POL: I need your vote!

VOTER: Okay, if you want my vote you need to give me lots of kickbacks. I want money back for buying a house, more money back for buying the right kind of refrigerator, and I would especially like government to get deeply involved in my marriage and provide lots of privileges for getting married.

POL: You got it!

GAY: I'd like those, too!

VOTER: Oh, look at those fags. They want SPECIAL PRIVILEGES! There's your gay agenda right there. Grrrrrrr!

 

[WorldWatcher]

...lol...you should change your name from "Worldwatcher" to "Statewatcher". As the states learn the true sedition of what's been going on with this gay marriage thing, especially in California where gay leaders [Leno] and their advocates-in-crime in high places are strong-arming people away from their protected rights to consensus on the matter.

When voters of various states learn that the "you have no choice but to approve gay marriage" state of affairs in California is as seditious as it factually is, well...voters tend to not like to hear the words "you have to or else".

Yes, just change your name to "Statewatcher" because the unchecked momentum of the gay-steamroller is about to hit a rut in the middle of the road. That rut is called "the DOMA Decision".

When lucid debate fails, there's always ad hominems..lol..

Finally, we can agree.



>>>>

 

[Jarlaxle]

When lucid debate fails, there's always ad hominems..lol.. You guys know this is an important topic to me. When our family friend died from AIDS from being "gay" after being manufactured that way by a child molestor and left confused, still loving women but only able to become aroused around men, I made it a life mission to educate people about what my experience with "gay" really is.

Come on, Silly...we both know you don't do "debate". You flame. You troll. You lie. You spam. But you just don't have any interest in the whole "debate" thing!

Sorry if it puts a monkey wrench in your "gay is totally OK" platform. Gay isn't totally OK. Not in my book and not from what I've seen.

You are batshit insane and hate gays with a passion...this is NOT news, Silly.

 

[Silhouette]

Must've struck a chord because Jar Jar only shows up when things are getting nervous on the opposite side of the debate.

Look. The politicians can google the Chick-fil-a lines in photos all around the country. Go call all those people in line "insane" too. See how well that's received at the voting booth...

 

[Jarlaxle]

I only read your idiocy when I need a laugh, Silly. Gays are getting married. The sky has NOT fallen.