Page 1 of 1
Well that sucks.
PostPosted:Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:00 pm
by Eric
<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5685429/">h ... 685429/</a>
Well that sucks.</div>
PostPosted:Thu Aug 12, 2004 7:38 pm
by Julius Seeker
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I've already said my opinion on the issue a dozen times, no need to repeat it since I know nearly all of the people here have the opposite opinion.</div>
PostPosted:Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:34 pm
by Zeus
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>That's just dumb</div>
PostPosted:Thu Aug 12, 2004 10:11 pm
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>You'll just have to marry Lox in Hawaii I guess...</div>
PostPosted:Thu Aug 12, 2004 10:14 pm
by Ishamael
<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '><img src="
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/ ... index.html">
While we're on the topic, check this out! Married NJ governer resigns because he had a homosexual affair. This should be the plot of a bad Lifetime movie, but it's real! We're not worthy....</div>
PostPosted:Thu Aug 12, 2004 11:17 pm
by Eric
<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '>Oh Ish, you know I got my eyes on you sweetie.</div>
PostPosted:Fri Aug 13, 2004 12:43 am
by SineSwiper
<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>It sucks, but the judges are right. You can't just break the law to get what you want. This needs to be fought in the legal system first.</div>
PostPosted:Fri Aug 13, 2004 8:09 am
by ManaMan
<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Yes you can. It's called judicial action and it's much faster than lobbying the legislative branch of government when trying to change a law with popular support.</div>
PostPosted:Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:41 am
by Kupek
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>The Constitution trumps any local laws; I think the 14th ammendment could apply.</div>
PostPosted:Fri Aug 13, 2004 2:05 pm
by Stephen
<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>What the SF mayor did was in no way "judicial action."</div>
PostPosted:Fri Aug 13, 2004 2:09 pm
by Stephen
<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>No, Sine's right. Elected officials cannot appeal to the Constitution to circumvent written laws. You can challenge same-sex marriage bans on 14th Amendment grounds, but you can't claim that the amendment allows you to arbitrarily disregard them.</div>
PostPosted:Fri Aug 13, 2004 2:29 pm
by Gentz
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>I just don't understand why people give such a shit about who marries who.</div>
PostPosted:Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:09 pm
by Tessian
<div style='font: 11pt Dominion; text-align: left; '>There's actually a law in San Fransisco/CA (forget which) that was written in the past 20 years that said Marriage is only between a man and a woman</div>
PostPosted:Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:40 am
by ManaMan
<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>It's kind of like what happened during the civil rights movements, break a law that had broad-based conservative support and then challenge it in court, with liberal judges, and have them rule that the law is wrong and you are right.</div>
PostPosted:Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:41 am
by ManaMan
<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>It's kind of like what happened during the civil rights movements, break a law that has broad-based conservative support and then challenge it in court, with liberal judges, and have them rule that the law is wrong and you are right.</div>
PostPosted:Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:15 pm
by Stephen
<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Well, in this case the mayor was an elected executive official whose primary duty is to uphold the law, not subvert it. (I would also dispute the civil rights/gay marriage comparison, but that's another debate for another time.)</div>