or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Suck it, haters.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Suck it, haters. - Page 2

post #41 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Bigots who are against gays and minorities.

I am for minorities and truthfully speaking I am for a man and a woman as a couple when they are married.To me this is not right when 2 men or women are married especially when children are involved. Psychologically this screws up the child's mind in my opinion.
post #42 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I am for minorities and truthfully speaking I am for a man and a woman as a couple when they are married.To me this is not right when 2 men or women are married especially when children are involved. Psychologically this screws up the child's mind in my opinion.

There are plenty of studies that show that this is wrong thinking.
post #43 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There are plenty of studies that show that this is wrong thinking.


A bit more about why you are talking out your ass.


Quote:
Amendments and revisions
See also: California ballot proposition

The constitution of California distinguishes between constitutional amendments and revisions, the latter of which is considered to be a "substantial change to the entire constitution, rather than ... a less extensive change in one or more of its provisions".[17] Both require passage of a California ballot proposition by voters, but they differ in how they may be proposed. An amendment may be placed on the ballot by either a two-thirds vote in the California State Legislature or signatures equal to 8% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election, among the lowest thresholds for similar measures of any U.S. state.[18] As of 2008, this was 694,354 signatures[19] compared to an estimated 2007 population of 36,553,215.[20] Revisions originally required a constitutional convention but today may be passed with the approval of both two-thirds of the legislature and a majority of voters; while simplified since its beginnings, the revision process is considered more politically charged and difficult to successfully pass than an amendment.[21]

The exact distinction between an amendment and a revision has never been clear, as highlighted by Proposition 8 in 2008.[citation needed] Passed as an initiative amendment in response to the California Supreme Court's finding that same-sex marriage was allowed under the constitution, the proposition defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Opponents argued that Proposition 8 constituted a revision, and was thus beyond the scope of the initiative process. However, the California Supreme Court eventually ruled that it was in fact an amendment, and within the rights of the voters to add to the constitution.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #44 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

we have a group of people who are treated as second class citizens.

If the government is treating them like second class citizens then my point is validated! You cannot trust the government to protect the rights you arr seeking permission to exercise.

But let's get more specific: In what specific ways are people being treated like second class citizens?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #45 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

In terms of the law, this is completely untrue. We need a constitution and laws to clarify what rights we have. Without that we may have rights by moral standards, but those rights would not be enforceable in court.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #46 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I see someone is in the second phase of the death of their ideology.

Tell me, tonton, what is my ideology?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #47 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There are plenty of studies that show that this is wrong thinking.

I agree with you, but only in terms of children not being psychologically "screwed up." Obviously that is not the case. However, I also think that the downfall of the traditional, nuclear family is a major problem in our society (or has caused major problems). One of the issues with same sex couples with children is their understanding of gender roles and having positive role models within those roles. I believe this is beneficial to children.

For example, I often open doors for my daughter. Why? One reason is that I want her to understand how men should treat her. She witnesses interaction between my wife and I, which reinforces her perception of how men and women in a relationship act, the roles they play, etc. Her understanding of a supportive mother and father is key as well. A child of a same-sex household does not see these roles and interactions...they have no role models in this regard. Of course, this does not mean they aren't loved and well cared for or that some harm will come to them because they are in that situation. However, I do think that if all things are equal, children benefit more from a traditional family arrangement.

So what does that mean, legally speaking? I believe that opposite sex couples should have priority over same sex couples when it comes to adoption (again, if all things are equal). This is the most beneficial environment for children on the whole.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #48 of 202
Two words: that typify the "Christian Taliban" religious right's bigotry, duplicity, hypocrisy and bloodymindedness on the matter.

Then, consider that much of the bile against gay marriage/civil unions spews from the supposedly 'moral' (!) "Bible Belt". ... the region with generally the highest rates of divorce, child abuse/child sex offenders, domestic violence, etc...
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #49 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Two words: that typify the "Christian Taliban" religious right's bigotry, duplicity, hypocrisy and bloodymindedness on the matter.

Then, consider that much of the bile against gay marriage/civil unions spews from the supposedly 'moral' (!) "Bible Belt". ... the region with generally the highest rates of divorce, child abuse/child sex offenders, domestic violence, etc...

Bigot.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #50 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Hmmm. This seems like you're way over-thinking this. First of all most of that would become standardized right away. It would just be a standard part of getting "married." There wouldn't be much to it.

Exactly what rights do you feel need guaranteeing here?

Contacts can't help you with the estate tax marriage deduction, it only works for the rights and privileges that a couple give each other, not the rights and privileges that marriage gives you wrt the IRS or other parts of the government.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #51 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Contacts can't help you with the estate tax marriage deduction, it only works for the rights and privileges that a couple give each other, not the rights and privileges that marriage gives you wrt the IRS or other parts of the government.

I think you're looking at it backwards. The problem there is the existence of the tax itself not that select people are given an exemption from it. Eliminate the tax, eliminate the need to write all sorts of special exemptions for certain favored classes of people or situations. At the very least lower it and eliminate exemptions. Treat everyone equally this way.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #52 of 202
Thread Starter 
Yes, promote the further expanding American aristocracy.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #53 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Bigot.

Why is she a bigot? The statistics prove her assertion. For instance, a study was published quite recently that showed that 'red states' with more conservative sex education policies had a higher rate of teen pregnancy. There are studies that show that evangelicals have a higher divorce rate. The per capita molestation numbers are higher in more religious areas.

Is that bigotry?
post #54 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Tell me, tonton, what is my ideology?

http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/2008platform.pdf
post #55 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Yes, promote the further expanding American aristocracy.

What?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #56 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Why is she a bigot? The statistics prove her assertion. For instance, a study was published quite recently that showed that 'red states' with more conservative sex education policies had a higher rate of teen pregnancy. There are studies that show that evangelicals have a higher divorce rate. The per capita molestation numbers are higher in more religious areas.

Is that bigotry?

Is it bigotry if studies show black IQ is as a group lower than other racial groups and you begin assigning conclusions based on those studies? What if the rate of illegitimacy, divorce, incarceration, etc are all higher for that community and I start assigning labels that "typify" that community?

The same answer applies to both criteria.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #57 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Is it bigotry if studies show black IQ is as a group lower than other racial groups and you begin assigning conclusions based on those studies? What if the rate of illegitimacy, divorce, incarceration, etc are all higher for that community and I start assigning labels that "typify" that community?

The same answer applies to both criteria.

You're confusing biological effects with behavioral effects. Calling blacks dumber than whites and making changes based on such assertions is bigotry. Calling conservative and religious policies counterproductive and making changes based on such an assertion is absolutely not.
post #58 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There are plenty of studies that show that this is wrong thinking.

If you have children and when they grow up to be adults would you want your son or daughter to not marry the same gender?
post #59 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You're confusing biological effects with behavioral effects. Calling blacks dumber than whites and making changes based on such assertions is bigotry. Calling conservative and religious policies counterproductive and making changes based on such an assertion is absolutely not.

I'm not confusing it. Multiple leftists on these forums have claimed conservatism IS biological. They've linked to studies on IQ and on the size of certain regions of the brain. In short, they contend that conservatives are born that way.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #60 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm not confusing it. Multiple leftists on these forums have claimed conservatism IS biological. They've linked to studies on IQ and on the size of certain regions of the brain. In short, they contend that conservatives are born that way.

<makes popcorn>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #61 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

<makes popcorn>

Don't worry, he'll ignore it. Just like he did the bit above where he claimed prop 8 was overturned in part because it wasn't an amendment. Then I linked to where the court ruled it was and asked how it can be unconstitutional to amend your constitution and well... we've got crickets, not fireworks.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #62 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Why is she a bigot? The statistics prove her assertion. For instance, a study was published quite recently that showed that 'red states' with more conservative sex education policies had a higher rate of teen pregnancy. There are studies that show that evangelicals have a higher divorce rate. The per capita molestation numbers are higher in more religious areas.

Is that bigotry?

No, not in any accepted definition.

Those with no argument tend to resort to name-calling/ad hominems, or in real life away from the computer, shouting (Bill O'Reilly etc) or telling you to "shut up" (Rush Limbaugh etc).

When the comfort zone is ruffled, they kick out in a reactionary fashion. SDW2000 does this on a regular basis, as you have undoubtedly noticed.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #63 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Is it bigotry if studies show black IQ is as a group lower than other racial groups and you begin assigning conclusions based on those studies? What if the rate of illegitimacy, divorce, incarceration, etc are all higher for that community and I start assigning labels that "typify" that community?

The same answer applies to both criteria.

You've been reading "The Bell Curve" again?

Debunked.

And another view
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #64 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

You've been reading "The Bell Curve" again?

Debunked.

And another view

The point isn't to argue about "The Bell Curve." The point is to show that the reasoning for bigotry is true no matter which group it is applied agaisnt and that is just as true for African-Americans as it is for conservatives.


Quote:
The three great strategies for obscuring an issue are to introduce irrelevancies, to arouse prejudice, and to excite ridicule.... ---Bergen Evans, The Natural History of Nonsense

Apply that to your own quote above.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #65 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The point isn't to argue about "The Bell Curve." The point is to show that the reasoning for bigotry is true no matter which group it is applied agaisnt and that is just as true for African-Americans as it is for conservatives.

The point you made...
Quote:
"studies show black IQ is as a group lower than other racial groups"

... is the type of conclusion arrived at by the authors of "The Bell Curve", and widely debunked as pseudoscience.

From which properly peer reviewed studies/papers did you quote, re. the above claim?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #66 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

If you have children and when they grow up to be adults would you want your son or daughter to not marry the same gender?

Absofucking not if they are gay. If they are straight or if they are gay (which is how they are born, not raised), or even if they are bisexual, I want them to marry the one they love. Whomever they want, and society should embrace and celebrate their choice. That's what I want for everyone. Even my daughter.

If I knew my daughter were gay and she was going to marry a man (who presumably she didn't love) because that's what society wants her to do, I would tell her not to do it. I would be angry if she did, but it's her choice. But I wouldn't want it, no way.

That's the difference between bigoted and not bigoted.
post #67 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm not confusing it. Multiple leftists on these forums have claimed conservatism IS biological. They've linked to studies on IQ and on the size of certain regions of the brain. In short, they contend that conservatives are born that way.

Conservatives are not born conservative. People with low IQ may end up being conservative but that's a choice that is not genetic.
post #68 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

From which properly peer reviewed studies/papers did you quote, re. the above claim?

* Makes popcorn *
post #69 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Absofucking not if they are gay. If they are straight or if they are gay (which is how they are born, not raised), or even if they are bisexual, I want them to marry the one they love. Whomever they want, and society should embrace and celebrate their choice. That's what I want for everyone. Even my daughter.

If I knew my daughter were gay and she was going to marry a man (who presumably she didn't love) because that's what society wants her to do, I would tell her not to do it. I would be angry if she did, but it's her choice. But I wouldn't want it, no way.

That's the difference between bigoted and not bigoted.

Thank GOD my 3 sons married women not men! Sometimes their choice is mixed up and you have to try to straighten them out before disaster happens.
post #70 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Absofucking not if they are gay. If they are straight or if they are gay (which is how they are born, not raised), or even if they are bisexual, I want them to marry the one they love.

Agreed. Though it depends on the law where she is. Perhaps we could change that to "be with" instead of "marry."

Quote:
Whomever they want, and society should embrace and celebrate their choice. That's what I want for everyone. Even my daughter.

That's the problem. First, no..society is not required to embrace them nor celebrate them. In fact, one of the problems I see today is that children are taught from a very young age that the world will always adapt to them. The reality is very different. And what's this..."their choice?" I thought they were born that way? It's exactly like I said: Most gays are "born that way," but there is an element of choice at times. That's why the arguments comparing gay marriage to interracial marriage are different.

Quote:

If I knew my daughter were gay and she was going to marry a man (who presumably she didn't love) because that's what society wants her to do, I would tell her not to do it. I would be angry if she did, but it's her choice. But I wouldn't want it, no way.

That's the difference between bigoted and not bigoted.

Does society force that now? This isn't 1912.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #71 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

Thank GOD my 3 sons married women not men! Sometimes their choice is mixed up and you have to try to straighten them out before disaster happens.

It is a disaster when someone marries, not because of love, but for convenience and the often stifling societal/familial pressure to conform to the majority. We have a choice, as to who we marry... but that is a compromised choice, in the case of a gay person. We do not have a choice as regards our sexual orientation, any more than we have a choice as to the color of our skin.

.... that all (men) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness... but you have to conform to the majority to qualify?

...after all, we are all only here once, as far as we know. We each have one shot at this.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #72 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

First, no..society is not required to embrace them nor celebrate them.

Of course society cann't be forced to embrace anything. But it would be much nicer if it did.
post #73 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Of course society cann't be forced to embrace anything. But it would be much nicer if it did.

I do not know how old you are but I am 67 years old and when i was growing up society was not screwed up like now with children suing parents and having no respect at all today.Pretty pathetic indeed.We respected our teachers and police and people were more civil also.
post #74 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I do not know how old you are but I am 67 years old and when i was growing up society was not screwed up like now with children suing parents and having no respect at all today.Pretty pathetic indeed.We respected our teachers and police and people were more civil also.

Just because all the crap was hidden from scrutiny doesn't mean it wasn't there. When you were growing up, in many places a black man and a white woman couldn't get married without being beat up or worse. Do you really call society back then better?
post #75 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Of course society cann't be forced to embrace anything. But it would be much nicer if it did.

Agreed. However, isn't an activist court panel overturning (based on their own moral beliefs) a duly passed state Constitutional amendment forcing people to embrace something?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #76 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

The point you made...

... is the type of conclusion arrived at by the authors of "The Bell Curve", and widely debunked as pseudoscience.

From which properly peer reviewed studies/papers did you quote, re. the above claim?

I'm not making the claim dork. I'm saying if I claim science as the basis of being a bigot, then is it okay to be a bigot? People like YOURSELF are making bigoted claims.

Here is what you said "the region with generally the highest rates of divorce, child abuse/child sex offenders, domestic violence, etc..."

Do you think that if we checked into certain ethnic enclaves that we wouldn't see high rates of lawbreaking, criminality or just low rates of educations, marriage and high rates of illegitimacy as examples?

Now if I use those to draw blanket conclusions about a group guess what that is called. BIGOTED. You did that with conservatives. I only mentioned another group to get your to see your bad reasoning applied somewhere else. It is bullshit reasoning and that was why I said, if I applied YOUR reason here, would you call it bullshit. You did and guess what, it is bullshit in the first domain as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Conservatives are not born conservative. People with low IQ may end up being conservative but that's a choice that is not genetic.

Conservative is just a label. The studies said it was not a choice but a function of biology. I'm sorry but you can't get around it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

* Makes popcorn *

I'm sorry did you ever explain how you were busted flat out talkig out of your ass? Have you or anyone yet explained how it can be unconstitutional to amend your own constitution?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #77 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm not making the claim dork. I'm saying if I claim science as the basis of being a bigot, then is it okay to be a bigot? People like YOURSELF are making bigoted claims.

Here is what you said "the region with generally the highest rates of divorce, child abuse/child sex offenders, domestic violence, etc..."

Do you think that if we checked into certain ethnic enclaves that we wouldn't see high rates of lawbreaking, criminality or just low rates of educations, marriage and high rates of illegitimacy as examples?

Now if I use those to draw blanket conclusions about a group guess what that is called. BIGOTED. You did that with conservatives. I only mentioned another group to get your to see your bad reasoning applied somewhere else. It is bullshit reasoning and that was why I said, if I applied YOUR reason here, would you call it bullshit. You did and guess what, it is bullshit in the first domain as well.

Liberal's can't be bigoted.

Quote:

Conservative is just a label. The studies said it was not a choice but a function of biology. I'm sorry but you can't get around it.

They will try.

Quote:

I'm sorry did you ever explain how you were busted flat out talkig out of your ass? Have you or anyone yet explained how it can be unconstitutional to amend your own constitution?

No one is interested in that. Their position is right, and that's the end of it. They will support any development that aides their position, whether that development is right or wrong. Win at any cost.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #78 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

No one is interested in that. Their position is right, and that's the end of it. They will support any development that aides their position, whether that development is right or wrong. Win at any cost.

I'm sorry, but it's not the liberals who are insisting that it's not the court's duty to interpret the constitutionality of laws. "Activist judges"? "Legislation by the courts"? Fucking ridiculous notions that our system isn't working exactly the way it was set up to work. Just because you don't like the outcome. That's what reeks of immoral position.
post #79 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I'm sorry, but it's not the liberals who are insisting that it's not the court's duty to interpret the constitutionality of laws.

Yeah, it really is. And O'Connor was by far not the most liberal USSC justice out there. By far.

Quote:


"Activist judges"? "Legislation by the courts"? Fucking ridiculous notions that our system isn't working exactly the way it was set up to work. Just because you don't like the outcome. That's what reeks of immoral position.

Both notions are completely counter to how our system was set up. There are countless examples of liberal judges rewriting the law (and even the Constitution) to suit their ideology. The best example is Roe. v. Wade, but there are others. Consider the the FSSC on the Bush v. Gore decision. There was clear law on the books about when recounts had to be finished. They ignored it and ordered another recount. The CA gay marriage amendment is no different. There is nothing that prevents a state from amending its constitution on that issue. The 9th circuit simply didn't like it.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #80 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Agreed. However, isn't an activist court panel overturning (based on their own moral beliefs) a duly passed state Constitutional amendment forcing people to embrace something?

An activist court is a court that uses valid legal arguments to decide something in a way that you disagree with.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Suck it, haters.