Register to leave a comment, or log in if you already have an account
Etson that’s a nonsequitor as 200 years ago people weren’t fighting for gay marriage. If we wanted to use your argument, we could say it’s ‘bizarre’ to allow miscegenation, women voters, free blacks, etc.
“The plaintiffs demonstrated by “overwhelming evidenceâ€
that Proposition 8 violates constitutional equal protection rights, Walker said in his ruling, which prohibits California from enforcing the ban.
“Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license,†Walker wrote. “Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples.â€
Ha! “radical, extremist ideas” I like that. I’d better go tell a bunch of my friends that they’re Radical Extremists! And I guess I’m a radical extremist Sympathizer! Yikes!
In other words, have gay marriage or don’t have gay marriage, but the idea that it was just fine to not allow it for 200+ years and now to do so is suddenly ‘unconstitutional’ to be bizarre.
BrooklynCouch, while I think you are dead ass wrong, I respect that you have the stones to say what you really think despite the high number of gays on this blog.
Ok…back to the sidelines and my bowl of popcorn. Where’s my damn root beer? WAITRESS!
The US Constitution seems to mean whatever some random judge on some random day wants it to mean. It had a good purpose once but now its meaning now seems to just be in the eye of the beholder, to be used for whatever political purpose an individual judge sees fit.
BrooklynCouch , thanks for shining the light on your neanderthal thinking.
What else id harmful to society in your view? I’m really interested in hearing this since i rarely interact with people from so far left on the intellectual bell curve.
Yo’re an attorney, right??? Did you miss costitutional law class because you were at home painting your parents trailer?
Temporary Stay Granted… until appeal–thanks for small favors.
Because I am against gay marriage as harmful to society. Because kids are best raised by a man and a woman? Because men and women are fundamentally different? Because 5000 years of civilization counts for something. Because radical, extremist ideas shouldn’t be legitimized by judges (they should be voted upon)? Because I don’t want “same-sex couples getting equal dibs in adoptions. Because I don’t want my country going down the toilet like Europe has, and is.
Etson that’s a nonsequitor as 200 years ago people weren’t fighting for gay marriage. If we wanted to use your argument, we could say it’s ‘bizarre’ to allow miscegenation, women voters, free blacks, etc.
etson — it wasn’t fine before, just the question wasn’t asked.
“The plaintiffs demonstrated by “overwhelming evidenceâ€
that Proposition 8 violates constitutional equal protection rights, Walker said in his ruling, which prohibits California from enforcing the ban.
“Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license,†Walker wrote. “Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples.â€
Ha! “radical, extremist ideas” I like that. I’d better go tell a bunch of my friends that they’re Radical Extremists! And I guess I’m a radical extremist Sympathizer! Yikes!
I’m glad Al Qaeda doesn’t stand for gay marriage!
In other words, have gay marriage or don’t have gay marriage, but the idea that it was just fine to not allow it for 200+ years and now to do so is suddenly ‘unconstitutional’ to be bizarre.
BrooklynCouch, while I think you are dead ass wrong, I respect that you have the stones to say what you really think despite the high number of gays on this blog.
Ok…back to the sidelines and my bowl of popcorn. Where’s my damn root beer? WAITRESS!
General observation not specific to this case:
The US Constitution seems to mean whatever some random judge on some random day wants it to mean. It had a good purpose once but now its meaning now seems to just be in the eye of the beholder, to be used for whatever political purpose an individual judge sees fit.
BrooklynCouch , thanks for shining the light on your neanderthal thinking.
What else id harmful to society in your view? I’m really interested in hearing this since i rarely interact with people from so far left on the intellectual bell curve.
Yo’re an attorney, right??? Did you miss costitutional law class because you were at home painting your parents trailer?
Temporary Stay Granted… until appeal–thanks for small favors.
Because I am against gay marriage as harmful to society. Because kids are best raised by a man and a woman? Because men and women are fundamentally different? Because 5000 years of civilization counts for something. Because radical, extremist ideas shouldn’t be legitimized by judges (they should be voted upon)? Because I don’t want “same-sex couples getting equal dibs in adoptions. Because I don’t want my country going down the toilet like Europe has, and is.
That’s a short answer for a reno blog.