Proposition 8 ruled unconstitutional..

[TikkaT3]

They can't.

vetteman was asked to do so hours ago and has refused on the grounds that he can't.

Don't try to drag me into your fight with Vett, I respect the guy. I am not happy about this, I just think there are a lot of other things more important to get worked up about.

 

[swordandsandle]

One thing that puzzles me.

Why was it a huge conflict of interest for a judge in Lousiana to rule on oil drilling when he owned some mutual funds containing energy stocks...

...but it's a non-issue if a gay judge rules on whether gay marriage is constitutional? Doesn't he stand to benefit personally?

I don't particularly care about the ruling, but it seems odd that those who were up in arms about the other judge don't seem to care about this, perhaps because of the decision.

No, I don't beleive their is a difference.

I think that the judge in Lousiana had the right to rule on oil drilling too, as he is a judge. However, the question was not constitutional in nature, so I favor the party that has the Federal legal document to back him up

 

[jeninflorida]

Don't try to drag me into your fight with Vett, I respect the guy. I am not happy about this, I just think there are a lot of other things more important to get worked up about.

private pepper is a tool wanna be...I'm just saying

 

[overthebow]

One thing that puzzles me.

Why was it a huge conflict of interest for a judge in Lousiana to rule on oil drilling when he owned some mutual funds containing energy stocks...

...but it's a non-issue if a gay judge rules on whether gay marriage is constitutional? Doesn't he stand to benefit personally?

I don't particularly care about the ruling, but it seems odd that those who were up in arms about the other judge don't seem to care about this, perhaps because of the decision.

Moron.

It's not like the judge gets a few pennies from each sexual act between to men in San Francisco (after CAPEX)

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I said "tax policy," you could look it up. That's what was being discussed, not economic stability, which is only tangentially related to tax policy.

And I did look up your quote: "If you need to fight a war you go to able bodied young men."

oooooh....semantics war!!!

I can play that one, too! Watch:

Marriage = Person + Person

Making Babies = Male + Female

Making A Family = People + People + People

One thing that puzzles me.

Why was it a huge conflict of interest for a judge in Lousiana to rule on oil drilling when he owned some mutual funds containing energy stocks...

...but it's a non-issue if a gay judge rules on whether gay marriage is constitutional? Doesn't he stand to benefit personally?

I don't particularly care about the ruling, but it seems odd that those who were up in arms about the other judge don't seem to care about this, perhaps because of the decision.

Because!

Energy Stocks = Sexual Orientation

Semantics War! (well, not even close in this case, but I see what you're doing here!)

 

[firespin]

Moron.

It's not like the judge gets a few pennies from each sexual act between to men in San Francisco (after CAPEX)

Moron.

He could legally marry.

Not all benefits are financial.

 

[unregistered]

 

[firespin]

I can play that one, too! Watch:

Marriage = Person + Person

Making Babies = Male + Female

Making A Family = People + People + People

Trying to get a job on Fox News?

 

[unregistered]

 

[overthebow]

Moron.

He could legally marry.

Not all benefits are financial.

Moron.

You mentioned the judge who owned stock and stood to gain financially. Ethic laws are about financial gain more than anything else. They are not about "who do you get to marry."

 

[jeninflorida]

Did I say it had any impact on married couples? I may have asked "who decides?" When did I refuse on any grounds?

...and thank god obama has kagen (or what ever his name is)....

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Did I say it had any impact on married couples? I may have asked "who decides?" When did I refuse on any grounds?

I don't recall if you did, but that wasn't my question.

So why haven't you answered my question from hours ago?

 

[TikkaT3]

private pepper is a tool wanna be...I'm just saying

*snickers*

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_itxeexAFd4U/SYXj8RFQV4I/AAAAAAAAGkg/HkAerjoTh6E/s400/GomerPyle3.jpg

 

[jeninflorida]

hehehehe, that's funny

*snickers*

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_itxeexAFd4U/SYXj8RFQV4I/AAAAAAAAGkg/HkAerjoTh6E/s400/GomerPyle3.jpg

 

[unregistered]

 

[firespin]

Moron.

You mentioned the judge who owned stock and stood to gain financially. Ethic laws are about financial gain more than anything else. They are not about "who do you get to marry."

Spoken like somebody who has no knowledge of the topic.

Most judicial ethics canons are about maintaining confidence in the judicial system, and cover primarily non-financial aspects, including a judges political activity, memberships, public statements, etc. Here are California's ethics standards for judges:

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/documents/ca_code_judicial_ethics.pdf

In particular for this case, judges need to avoid:

(c) the circumstances are such that a reasonable person aware of the facts would doubt the justice’s ability to be impartial.

 

[Luk]

...and thank god obama has kagen (or what ever his name is)....

Once again, jenn proves the only two politicians she knows are Obama and Pelosi.

 

[eyer]

Thanks for your newest sig, Byron - I've not read/heard it before.

"On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."

—Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823

The problem libs/socialists have with "probable" here is their base character trait of relativism - "probable" being relative to whomever reads it, instead of centering on exactly what Jeff meant. And that's exactly what TJ is implying re: the Constitution also.

But this is not an exercise socialists can participate in, for it takes closed-minded, logical discipline to discover truth...

...to a socialist, truth is also relative, as is their "open-mindedness": where anything/everything, because it is relative, is equal and acceptable...

...and with that note, swordandsandle:

YOU'RE IGNORED! (credit to DTrump)

They shoot lawyers, don't they?

 

[Luk]

The problem libs/socialists <snip the rest of its nonsense)

As soon as these words are typed as being the same, your point/argument becomes irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Peregrinator]

Not to be fussy about it, but marriage is not the same as sticking your dick in something, and tax policy isn't national security.

If it "makes sense" to keep women out of combat, or to exempt people from paying taxes, because, well, it's obvious, then it "makes sense" to have one each bride and groom for the same reason.

All of those are arguments about discrimination, and lots of people agree with each of them. (Though not necessarily the same people for each proposition.)

Let's let women engage in combat, ffs. They've been doing so as MP's forever.

One thing that puzzles me.

Why was it a huge conflict of interest for a judge in Lousiana to rule on oil drilling when he owned some mutual funds containing energy stocks...

...but it's a non-issue if a gay judge rules on whether gay marriage is constitutional? Doesn't he stand to benefit personally?

I don't particularly care about the ruling, but it seems odd that those who were up in arms about the other judge don't seem to care about this, perhaps because of the decision.

There might be a conflict there, but as others have said, there's no financial gain. I'm not sure if that argues with you or not.

 

[firespin]

There might be a conflict there, but as others have said, there's no financial gain. I'm not sure if that argues with you or not.

Think of this way. What issue has had a more emotional response in recent weeks, with supporters saying "At last, equality and freedom to be treated like the rest of society!" Clearly, the perception is this is a major accomplishment for gay Americans, granting them a major benefit.

This judge made a ruling that made that accomplishment possible, to his benefit. It's arguably more valuable than money, since it wasn't possible for people to obtain that result for any sum of money before.

 

[Peregrinator]

Think of this way. What issue has had a more emotional response in recent weeks, with supporters saying "At last, equality and freedom to be treated like the rest of society!" Clearly, the perception is this is a major accomplishment for gay Americans, granting them a major benefit.

This judge made a ruling that made that accomplishment possible, to his benefit. It's arguably more valuable than money, since it wasn't possible for people to obtain that result for any sum of money before.

Well, okay.

I still fail to see how this ruling negatively affects anyone at all.

 

[cebalrai]

Well, okay.

I still fail to see how this ruling negatively affects anyone at all.

It negatively impacts people such as Vettebigot and Jenin's ability to inflict their bigotry on others. It makes it harder for them to remove freedoms of American citzens.

 

[cebalrai]

The problem libs/socialists have...

You're a fucking moron not worth half a rat's ass. And put me back on iggy.

 

[byejune121]

I'm just posting to tell Eyer that he should add me to his apparently very extensive ignore list. Heaven forbid he hears anything outside of his hive mind. Issues of equal rights from the 14th amendment and separation of church and state are secondary to his insular views.

To end this:

LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS

SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS, SOCIALISTS,