So the Proposition 8 case has been handed to the California Supreme Court. Which way are they going to rule?
One of the arguments that the anti-gay marriage attorney made was something to the effect that "if the people vote for it you can't overrule it". I think he may be a bit off in his thinking. I'm rooting for the homos, but I'm not overly optimistic.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Place your bets
Place your betsFollow
Obviously if the people vote in favor of an unconstitutional law it can and will be overturned. That's really the issue in question.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Something about marriage not being a religious only thing will probably pop into their heads at some point during the "deliberations".
Dear people I don't like: 凸(â—´―｀â—)凸
#4REDACTED,
Posted: Mar 05 2009 at 1:15 PM, Rating: Unrated, (Expand Post) Why should married couples receive benefits singles do not?
bluffratt wrote:
Why should married couples receive benefits singles do not?
Because that's the way it's set up, silly.
No clue. My understanding is that the case isn't really about SSM but about whether the way the state constitution was changed was procedurally correct. The whole "rights" thing ties into it but it's mainly based on a technicality.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
I'll place my bet on Prop 8 being upheld as a valid constitutional amendment.
Not because I've researched precedent ... just a guess, and I hope I'm wrong.
Not because I've researched precedent ... just a guess, and I hope I'm wrong.
The argument that the attorney general made was that an neither an amendment or a revision can make the constitition violate itself without explicity saying that is what it's doing (re: on a national level, prohibition and its subsequent repeal.) Since Prop 8 takes away what is a protected "inaliable" right, it is making the constitution of California violate itself.
Or something.
Let alone the whole "majority cannot overturn the rights of the minority" ethical argument.
Considering this is the court that originally ruled that the constitution of California didn't disallow gay marriage to begin with, I'm cautiously optimistic.
Or something.
Let alone the whole "majority cannot overturn the rights of the minority" ethical argument.
Considering this is the court that originally ruled that the constitution of California didn't disallow gay marriage to begin with, I'm cautiously optimistic.
I'm hearing the judges are raking the anti-Prop 8 guys over the coals.
Well, were. It's over now.
Well, were. It's over now.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Quote:
I thought we were discussing rights of citizens? Why should one group have benefits others do not? I know the answer to this, do you?
Deliciously ironic rhetorical question is delicious.
So the Proposition 8 case has been handed to the California Supreme Court. Which way are they going to rule?
Against the gays, won't be close. These are elected Justices, remember.
Edit: Before the pedantry starts, yes, they're not elected, but they face the real threat of electoral unseating if they rule against Prop 8 here. If they rule for it and public opinion changes, another Proposition can be passed and they'll uphold that, too.
Edited, Mar 5th 2009 7:05pm by Smasharoo
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Quote:
Obviously if the people vote in favor of an unconstitutional law it can and will be overturned. That's really the issue in question.
It most likely will be, but it will be handled by the U.S. Supreme Court. Each state has the right to make its own laws and amendments to their constitution, but the U.S. Supreme Court can (has) overturn them.
I just want to ask this, where in the United States Constitution (not bill of rights) does it say that states shall not make laws that will persecute a segment of the population based on sex, preference, or race?
The amendments dealing with slavery and blacks are limited only to race, not gender, or sexual preference.
The United States Constitution wrote:
Amendment XIII
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The United States Constitution wrote:
Amendment XV
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Quote:
The amendments dealing with slavery and blacks are limited only to race, not gender, or sexual preference.
I feel sad that we live in an age where just because it's technically not written down we can have our implied human rights taken away.
Dear people I don't like: 凸(â—´―｀â—)凸
Why don't we just throw out the Constitution and start fresh? Actually, I think this should be done every hundred years or so when societal values change.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
The One and Only Deadgye wrote:
Quote:
The amendments dealing with slavery and blacks are limited only to race, not gender, or sexual preference.
I feel sad that we live in an age where just because it's technically not written down we can have our implied human rights taken away.
I don't think we can. Not according to the 9th amendment anyway
The 9th Amendment wrote:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Quote:
Why don't we just throw out the Constitution and start fresh? Actually, I think this should be done every hundred years or so when societal values change.
The constitution was written to specifically vague. It is the Supreme Court's duty to further define it, such as the recent case involving the Second Amendment. The court deals with all forms of cases, but it's primary duty is to define and uphold the constitution. That is why I said the Prop 8 mess will eventually be heard by the supreme court. It will take years for this to happen though. The case (once ruled, and only if it upholds Prop 8) will head to the circuit court to be heard and ruled on. Only after that a petition to the Supreme Court can be made and if (most likely) the supreme court decides to hear the case then their ruling is final.
Edited to add:
I might have missed a step in the appeal process, I am too tired to go looking for the information. This is a round about way of a case getting to the point where it would be heard by the highest court in the U.S.
Edited, Mar 9th 2009 7:10am by SimpleMajority
It most likely will be, but it will be handled by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The current court is highly unlikely to bother with Marriage cases anytime in the near future. If Scalia and Thomas get hit by lightning and die, then, maybe.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
It most likely will be, but it will be handled by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The current court is highly unlikely to bother with Marriage cases anytime in the near future. If Scalia and Thomas get hit by lightning and die, then, maybe.
A beautiful sentiment.
Edited, Mar 9th 2009 11:33am by Deathwysh
Smasharoo wrote:
If Scalia and Thomas get hit by lightning and die, then, maybe.
In appreciation for your hard work, please accept this gift of a copper plated rain hat...
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
If Scalia and Thomas get hit by lightning and die, then, maybe.
In appreciation for your hard work, please accept this gift of a copper plated rain hat...
...featuring a Kaiser Wilhelm spike so everyone will know how imperial you are!
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Recent Visitors: 271
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (271)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Place your bets
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC