The Evidence Supporting Prop 8 As Law In California Becomes Overwhelming

[bodecea]

he was merely stating a fact. the obsession is yours.

mhmmm...

Its a fact, the majority of blacks in Ca voted against gay marriage. Do you deny that fact?

Moving the goalposts I see.

 

[Redfish]

mhmmm...

Its a fact, the majority of blacks in Ca voted against gay marriage. Do you deny that fact?

Moving the goalposts I see.

its a simple question, did a majority of blacks in CA vote against gay marriage or not? same question for hispanics? yes or no.


you and wytch are in the minority, the libs in sacramento and DC are trying to buy your votes by lying to you. quite pathetic really.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Its a fact, the majority of blacks in Ca voted against gay marriage. Do you deny that fact?

Moving the goalposts I see.

its a simple question, did a majority of blacks in CA vote against gay marriage or not? same question for hispanics? yes or no.


you and wytch are in the minority, the libs in sacramento and DC are trying to buy your votes by lying to you. quite pathetic really.

What’s pathetic is your ignorance of our legal system.

No majority, whatever their make-up, has the authority to decide who will or will not have his rights, in this case the right of same-sex couples to have equal access to marriage law, as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.

The citizens of our Constitutional Republic are subject only to the rule of law, not men, as men are incapable of ruling justly.

Proposition 8 is proof of that.

 

[Seawytch]

No, wytchey, you refuse to because it makes a sham of your "marriage".

Your civil union or mutual support contract is fine and would give your the rights that you want (and deserve). But what you have is not, and never will be, a marriage.

Then that's all straight couples need too. When that is the standard that applies to all consenting adult couples, great. Until then, my marriage is almost exactly like yours (once Section II of DOMA falls, it will be EXACTLY the same)

wrong again, a same sex union will never be the same as a man/woman marriage. I know you want it to be, and I feel sorry for you, but you are an aberation of the human condition.

But you should be afforded equal rights and should not be discriminated against because of your affliction, but to call a gay hook up a marriage is simply wrong in every way.

It already is the same (except for the full faith and credit thing, but that will change too).

I have a marriage, legally and spiritually. Has the world ended yet?

 

[JakeStarkey]

SCOTUS has opined, the reactionaries have whined, and the winners have dined.

Too bad for you, losers.

 

[bodecea]

This message is hidden because JakeStarkey is on your ignore list.

you are wasting your typing energy, snake. I told you how to get off ignore. Come clean about who and what you really are. Admit that you are a dem plant who is paid to pretend to be a republican and spouts dem/lib lies and talking points for 10 cents a post.

Wouldst thou care for a tissue?

 

[JakeStarkey]

This message is hidden because JakeStarkey is on your ignore list.

you are wasting your typing energy, snake. I told you how to get off ignore. Come clean about who and what you really are. Admit that you are a dem plant who is paid to pretend to be a republican and spouts dem/lib lies and talking points for 10 cents a post.

Wouldst thou care for a tissue?

He whines, bodecea, because that all he is capable of doing.

 

[Silhouette]

SCOTUS has opined, the reactionaries have whined, and the winners have dined.

Too bad for you, losers.

Yes, and here's what they Opined, page 14, DOMA Ruling: http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/06/supreme-court-doma-full-decision-text-pdf/

New York recognized same-sex marriages performed elsewhere; and then it later amended its own marriage laws to permit same-sex marriage. New York, in common with, as of this writing, 11 other States and the District of Columbia, decided that same-sex couples should have the right to marry

New York + 11 = 12. Nowhere was the 13th state, California, mentioned as having legal gay marriage.

Like I said. If you think you're legally "gay married" in California, think again. Upholding as it did that each of the 50 sovereign states had since the founding of our country, the constitutional right to consensus, a choice "yes" or "no" on gay marriage, means that California's consensus of Prop 8 cannot be excluded from that. No lower court, tribunal, AG or governor can override the US Supreme Court's Decision June 2013.

Take the entire DOMA Opinion to your attorney and ask if you shouldn't go to one of the 12 states that have gay marriage legal instead to make double sure that when the GOP takes office soon, your "marriage" won't be worth the paper it's written on, legally. Sure, anyone can pretend to be married or to marry people, like officials are doing against the law in CA. That won't save anyone when the debate finally renders out to consult DOMA on just how legal Prop 8 and the CA initiative system's consensus is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Silhouette the social traditionalist reactionary continues to fight against reality.

 

[WorldWatcher]

SCOTUS has opined, the reactionaries have whined, and the winners have dined.

Too bad for you, losers.

Yes, and here's what they Opined, page 14, DOMA Ruling: Supreme Court DOMA Ruling: Read Full Decision Here [DOC] | HEAVY

New York recognized same-sex marriages performed elsewhere; and then it later amended its own marriage laws to permit same-sex marriage. New York, in common with, as of this writing, 11 other States and the District of Columbia, decided that same-sex couples should have the right to marry

New York + 11 = 12. Nowhere was the 13th state, California, mentioned as having legal gay marriage.

Like I said. If you think you're legally "gay married" in California, think again. Upholding as it did that each of the 50 sovereign states had since the founding of our country, the constitutional right to consensus, a choice "yes" or "no" on gay marriage, means that California's consensus of Prop 8 cannot be excluded from that. No lower court, tribunal, AG or governor can override the US Supreme Court's Decision June 2013.

Take the entire DOMA Opinion to your attorney and ask if you shouldn't go to one of the 12 states that have gay marriage legal instead to make double sure that when the GOP takes office soon, your "marriage" won't be worth the paper it's written on, legally. Sure, anyone can pretend to be married or to marry people, like officials are doing against the law in CA. That won't save anyone when the debate finally renders out to consult DOMA on just how legal Prop 8 and the CA initiative system's consensus is.

Just to point out a couple of things:

1. The specific item on page 14 says (emphasis mine) "New York, in common with, as of this writing, 11 other States and the District of Columbia, decided that same-sex couples should have the right to marry and so live with pride in themselves and their union and in a status of equality with all other married persons." The writing of the opinion occurs before the decided date of June 26th, 2013. Therefore at the time of the writing there were 12 states, the 13th state (California) didn't have it's case decision issued until the same day. So since it was written before it was issued (kind of hard to do anything else) the terminology is correct.

2. In the DOMA case the decision was "Because petitioners have not satisfied their burden to demonstrate standing to appeal the judgment of the District Court, the Ninth Circuit was without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. The judgment of the Ninth Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction." The court (SCOTUS) vacated the 9th's decision for lack of standing, that mean's the lower court ruling stands - that ruling was to overturn Prop 8.

3. RE: Whether the two posters here are legally married in California, that is quite simple. Yes they are. The California Constitution (Article 2, Section 10 - http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_2) specifies that amendments become effective the DAY AFTER the election/vote unless such an amendment specifies a different date. Since the Prop 8 Amendment contained no such date, it became effective the day after election day that November. Since the two posters in question indicate they were Civilly Married under the laws of California prior to election day, their Civil Marriage is still valid under the laws of California. That was also recognized by the California Supreme Court in it's decision on the matter - that those Civil Marriages entered into prior to the day after the election day of Nov, 2008 - remained valid.



>>>>

 

[Spoonman]

Gay Marriage is inevitable....better get used to it

not after we invade syria and russia takes us over

 

[JakeStarkey]

Same sex marriage in the USA will be complete in all jurisdictions by 2020.

 

[JakeStarkey]

IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not - The Maddow Blog










IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not


I imagine if you're a far-right culture warrior, today is one of those days you probably wish you hadn't gotten out of bed. The Obama administration's Department of Health and...


By Steve Benen|The Rachel Maddow

 

[Silhouette]

IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not - The Maddow Blog










IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not


I imagine if you're a far-right culture warrior, today is one of those days you probably wish you hadn't gotten out of bed. The Obama administration's Department of Health and...


By Steve Benen|The Rachel Maddow

I get what you're doing, the old "if I show enough entities "recognize" "gay marriage" then it will become real."

Just because a lot of people recognized cocaine users, doen't mean its legalization will become real..lol..

I'll, let you in on a little hint. If I married my dog and money was involved, the IRS would recognize that to if it meant a reason to glean away or keep tabs on extra cash. The IRS does not either trump the recent US Supreme Court finding that Prop 8's consensus in California was its legal and constitutional right. SCOTUS is it. The law. The last stop in on the train tracks. They said this right was retroactive to the founding of the country. Both Prop 8 and Prop 22 were lawfully decided thereby with consensus since the founding of the country. They are, therefore, the law. Article III in the CA state constitution mandates that no official there may refuse to enforce the iniatives once they are lawfully enacted. So, as we speak, Kamala Harris and Jerry Brown are in full contempt and violation of their state's constitution and in contempt of the US Supreme Court.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Silhoute, the IRS recognizes same sex marriage.

Just another nail in your coffin of denial.

 

[Seawytch]

Finally! I've been filing joint CA taxes for years...now Fed too!!! Woo freaking hoo!

 

[bodecea]

IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not - The Maddow Blog










IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not


I imagine if you're a far-right culture warrior, today is one of those days you probably wish you hadn't gotten out of bed. The Obama administration's Department of Health and...


By Steve Benen|The Rachel Maddow

I get what you're doing, the old "if I show enough entities "recognize" "gay marriage" then it will become real."

Just because a lot of people recognized cocaine users, doen't mean its legalization will become real..lol..

I'll, let you in on a little hint. If I married my dog and money was involved, the IRS would recognize that to if it meant a reason to glean away or keep tabs on extra cash. The IRS does not either trump the recent US Supreme Court finding that Prop 8's consensus in California was its legal and constitutional right. SCOTUS is it. The law. The last stop in on the train tracks. They said this right was retroactive to the founding of the country. Both Prop 8 and Prop 22 were lawfully decided thereby with consensus since the founding of the country. They are, therefore, the law. Article III in the CA state constitution mandates that no official there may refuse to enforce the iniatives once they are lawfully enacted. So, as we speak, Kamala Harris and Jerry Brown are in full contempt and violation of their state's constitution and in contempt of the US Supreme Court.

Go ahead. Tell us you know more about the SCOTUS decision than the IRS does.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, she will: Silhouette know everything.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not - The Maddow Blog










IRS will recognize same-sex marriages, even if states do not


I imagine if you're a far-right culture warrior, today is one of those days you probably wish you hadn't gotten out of bed. The Obama administration's Department of Health and...


By Steve Benen|The Rachel Maddow

I get what you're doing, the old "if I show enough entities "recognize" "gay marriage" then it will become real."

Just because a lot of people recognized cocaine users, doen't mean its legalization will become real..lol..

I'll, let you in on a little hint. If I married my dog and money was involved, the IRS would recognize that to if it meant a reason to glean away or keep tabs on extra cash. The IRS does not either trump the recent US Supreme Court finding that Prop 8's consensus in California was its legal and constitutional right. SCOTUS is it. The law. The last stop in on the train tracks. They said this right was retroactive to the founding of the country. Both Prop 8 and Prop 22 were lawfully decided thereby with consensus since the founding of the country. They are, therefore, the law. Article III in the CA state constitution mandates that no official there may refuse to enforce the iniatives once they are lawfully enacted. So, as we speak, Kamala Harris and Jerry Brown are in full contempt and violation of their state's constitution and in contempt of the US Supreme Court.

Obviously you’re unaware that this is pathetic, desperate, and ridiculous.

Laws prohibiting cocaine possession are rationally based, pursue a legitimate legislative end, and are applied to everyone equally, which is not the case with regard to states denying same-sex couples their equal protection rights.

Moreover, Article VI of the US Constitution trumps the California State constitution, where state and local governments are subject to the rulings of Federal courts. See: Cooper v. Aaron (1958). If Kamala Harris or Jerry Brown were to attempt to enforce an un-Constitutional measure such as Proposition 8, they would be at war with the Federal Constitution and in contempt of the Federal appeals court that invalidated Proposition 8.

 

[Trajan]

Gay Marriage is inevitable....better get used to it

yes it is, which makes this whole magilla sorta pointless and invites critique.


in 3 years a bill would pass that would easily pass vaporing all restrictions......instead we got another supreme court hash....