Proposition 8 ruled unconstitutional..

If it was all about the "will of the people" slavery would still be legal.
 
No. The will of the people won out.

The people of California have an equal protection clause in their constitution. The judge honored that.

To be fair here, Vetteman was only talking about the Californians that he likes, so he's sorta-kinda-maybe-eh-eh not wrong in what he's saying.

*gigglesnort*
 
A openly gay judge strikes down the will of the people of California. Let's see if Democrat Jerry Brown the big gay supporter takes it to the Supreme Court or lets it stand.

I find it interesting that it's the WILL OF THE PEOPLE in California when it's something you endorse when in fact it's only the will of SOME people and not even really half (as far as we know) because only about 79% of registered voters turned out.
 
I find it interesting that it's the WILL OF THE PEOPLE in California when it's something you endorse when in fact it's only the will of SOME people and not even really half (as far as we know) because only about 79% of registered voters turned out.
All that is irrelevant, really.

If a law is unconstitutional, there is a remedy.

The Constitution can be amended.
 
I was thinking the same thing. And where is Ish? They've probably keeled over with shock. We should call the hospitals.

I have a feeling that 2 out of 3 of those gentlemen are currently on their honeymoon.... just sayin.
 
I find it interesting that it's the WILL OF THE PEOPLE in California when it's something you endorse when in fact it's only the will of SOME people and not even really half (as far as we know) because only about 79% of registered voters turned out.

Well, I love that people say "the people voted for it"...

if there was an proposition that said that people making over 100k a year should be taxed a 50% of their income, and given to people who make under 50k, it would almost certainly pass... so would that make it a good idea?

Or is it only a good idea for majority opinion to matter SOME of the time (to those people who claim it)?
 
I'm not comfortable at all with this law.

As I was driving home today, I was surrounded by jubilation. One of these gay guys dragged me out of my car, forced himself on me, raping my sweet little butthole, and then had the audacity to ask for my hand in marriage afterwards.

:devil:
 
MMMmmmaybe.

LOL we should put that to the test. I bet you can't do it.

53% of those who voted, some 7 million, voted in favor of Prop 8. This is a democracy, majority is supposed to rule, but not with the liberal minority coalition who scoff at the democratic process and advance their agenda legislating from the bench by fiat. BTW it's twice been the will of the people. :rolleyes:

:rolleyes:
BTW I also hate when people say it's the WILL OF THE PEOPLE that Obama was elected. I'm one of the people and it certainly wasn't my will.
 
I'm not comfortable at all with this law.

As I was driving home today, I was surrounded by jubilation. One of these gay guys dragged me out of my car, forced himself on me, raping my sweet little butthole, and then had the audacity to ask for my hand in marriage afterwards.

:devil:

but what were you wearing? I bet you were asking for it.
 
It doesn't mean what you think it does or rich people wouldn't have to pay higher taxes than you do. Get real. We are talking about a California Constitutional Amendment here.

Trust me... it's the will of the people that rich people pay higher taxes... this door swings both ways... which is no comment on your affair with AJ and Ish.
 
It doesn't matter if it is a choice or not.

Should the government tell you that you should love brunettes and not blondes?

Civil marriage is a legal contract between consenting adults. Period. Case closed.

If I can marry Eve, but not Steve, my rights are violated.

Justices Ginsburg and Kennedy disagree with your conjecture. Ginsburg is on record as saying the crux of the argument hinges on whether something is a choice (conduct) or not. If homosexuality is NOT a choice (legally), then "protected class" status applies.
 
Justices Ginsburg and Kennedy disagree with your conjecture. Ginsburg is on record as saying the crux of the argument hinges on whether something is a choice (conduct) or not. If homosexuality is NOT a choice (legally), then "protected class" status applies.

Sure you can CHOOSE to not act on homosexuality... but that leads to all sorts of fucked up behavior, ala Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, and Larry Craig.
 
YAAAAY!

Now lesbians can marry.

All I need now is to find a hot lesbian chick.
 
It doesn't mean what you think it does or rich people wouldn't have to pay higher taxes than you do. Get real. We are talking about a California Constitutional Amendment here.


Hmmm...great point...

...where be all the socialist voices proclaiming this equality for all re: taxation?

Selective, no?

Truth is not if truth isn't consistent...

(translation for socialists: TRUTH is not relative...)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top