PoliticalGroove Forums

Welcome to the PoliticalGroove Forums

We offer discussion, social groups and blogs in an open and free environment. Our free community you will have access to post topics, post blogs, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!



Go Back   PoliticalGroove Forums > Issue Forums > In The News
Reload this Page Ca Sup Ct Oks Gay Marriage
Share PG Forum Register Blogs FAQ Members List Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Sponsors
Reply
Page 4 of 5 « First < 23 4 5 >
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-20-2008, 01:38 PM   #31 (permalink)
No-Kleenex Chris
Points: 26,362, Level: 97 Points: 26,362, Level: 97 Points: 26,362, Level: 97
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
 
ImusWallower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,991
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 266
Thanked 339 Times in 314 Posts
ImusWallower is a spectacular PG memberImusWallower is a spectacular PG member
im sure i will get yelled at, but didnt Californians vote in 2000 to recognize marriage as between a man and a woman? how can the supreme court strike down a democratically chosen law?
__________________
I like big butts and I can not lie
You other brothers can't deny
That when Chrisbb rolls in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
You get sprung
ImusWallower is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 03:48 PM   #32 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51
Activity: 21% Activity: 21% Activity: 21%
 
guest1234567's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,267
Thanks: 27
Thanked 106 Times in 80 Posts
guest1234567 has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisbb View Post
im sure i will get yelled at, but didnt Californians vote in 2000 to recognize marriage as between a man and a woman? how can the supreme court strike down a democratically chosen law?
The law was overturned because it was unconstitutional. (state constitution).
guest1234567 is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 04:31 PM   #33 (permalink)
No-Kleenex Chris
Points: 26,362, Level: 97 Points: 26,362, Level: 97 Points: 26,362, Level: 97
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
 
ImusWallower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,991
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 266
Thanked 339 Times in 314 Posts
ImusWallower is a spectacular PG memberImusWallower is a spectacular PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by guest1234567 View Post
The law was overturned because it was unconstitutional. (state constitution).
but if the majority of the people(61%) voted for it, how can that be wrong? i dont care either way really, but if the people wanted that law, they should get it
__________________
I like big butts and I can not lie
You other brothers can't deny
That when Chrisbb rolls in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
You get sprung
ImusWallower is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 04:48 PM   #34 (permalink)
Fiscal Conservative
Points: 6,272, Level: 51 Points: 6,272, Level: 51 Points: 6,272, Level: 51
Activity: 58% Activity: 58% Activity: 58%
 
Cookie's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: God's country
Posts: 2,196
My Mood:
Thanks: 185
Thanked 52 Times in 44 Posts
Cookie is a famous PG member
I don't know the political make-up of the CA Supreme Court, but I can see where a more liberal court would find the prior ruling unconstitutional on the grounds of discrimination toward gays.
__________________
Corgi butts drive me nuts.
Cookie is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 04:55 PM   #35 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51
Activity: 21% Activity: 21% Activity: 21%
 
guest1234567's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,267
Thanks: 27
Thanked 106 Times in 80 Posts
guest1234567 has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisbb View Post
but if the majority of the people(61%) voted for it, how can that be wrong? i dont care either way really, but if the people wanted that law, they should get it
Not without changing the constitution. It's the court's job to interpret the constitution as it is currently written. The voters must realize that just because an initiative is on the ballot, doesn't make it constitutional. And they should realize it by now because so many ballot initiatives have been reversed by the courts.

It's pretty stupid really, but we can't be having our judges rule on every ballot initiative, they'ld never get their real work done.
guest1234567 is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 04:56 PM   #36 (permalink)
No-Kleenex Chris
Points: 26,362, Level: 97 Points: 26,362, Level: 97 Points: 26,362, Level: 97
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
 
ImusWallower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,991
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 266
Thanked 339 Times in 314 Posts
ImusWallower is a spectacular PG memberImusWallower is a spectacular PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by guest1234567 View Post
Not without changing the constitution. It's the court's job to interpret the constitution as it is currently written. The voters must realize that just because an initiative is on the ballot, doesn't make it constitutional. And they should realize it by now because so many ballot initiatives have been reversed by the courts.

It's pretty stupid really, but we can't be having our judges rule on every ballot initiative, they'ld never get their real work done.
hmmm interesting. i figured if the people want it, it is so. course that could lead to nuclear war in some cases
__________________
I like big butts and I can not lie
You other brothers can't deny
That when Chrisbb rolls in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
You get sprung
ImusWallower is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 04:57 PM   #37 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51
Activity: 21% Activity: 21% Activity: 21%
 
guest1234567's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,267
Thanks: 27
Thanked 106 Times in 80 Posts
guest1234567 has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisbb View Post
hmmm interesting. i figured if the people want it, it is so. course that could lead to nuclear war in some cases
That would be the worst case scenario!
guest1234567 is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 06:24 PM   #38 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 2,384, Level: 29 Points: 2,384, Level: 29 Points: 2,384, Level: 29
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 352
My Mood:
Thanks: 20
Thanked 29 Times in 16 Posts
okpfloyd is a normal PG member
Has anyone considered that this ruling may destroy many good relationships?
okpfloyd is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 06:46 PM   #39 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51 Points: 6,342, Level: 51
Activity: 21% Activity: 21% Activity: 21%
 
guest1234567's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,267
Thanks: 27
Thanked 106 Times in 80 Posts
guest1234567 has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by okpfloyd View Post
Has anyone considered that this ruling may destroy many good relationships?
I've never thought gays should be denied the anguish of divorce, simply because they're gay. They can step up and succeed or fail in a committed relationship like the rest of us.
guest1234567 is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2008, 06:58 PM   #40 (permalink)
falling idealist
Points: 4,773, Level: 44 Points: 4,773, Level: 44 Points: 4,773, Level: 44
Activity: 42% Activity: 42% Activity: 42%
 
kaycee's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: no idea
Posts: 1,640
My Mood:
Thanks: 47
Thanked 45 Times in 32 Posts
kaycee is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by okpfloyd View Post
Has anyone considered that this ruling may destroy many good relationships?
How so?

Pressure by one to wed and the other partner not interested?
kaycee is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 4 of 5 « First < 23 4 5 >

Sponsors

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:23 PM.

Contact Us - PoliticalGroove Home - Archive - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC8
PoliticalGroove.com General political and social discussion