You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban - Los Angeles Times
So stupid that gov't is even involved in this at all.
Agreed.
There seems to be a solution in all this that no one talks about, and that is to get the government out of the marriage business. Leave it to churches to recognize what they want as marriage.
If the government wishes to extend "benefits" (like taking nearly 67% of my wife's paycheck) to those who choose to partner up for life, then call it something different. Those benefits need to be extended to all citizens.
A pretty bad day if you're part of the evangelical right....
And if you believe in the rule of law.
Lets start with this, I believe same sex marrages should be legal, on principal. They have nothing to do with me, and hurt no one, so why not?
That being said, not only did California vote on this, didn't it get added to the state Constitution if I remember right. (correct me if I am wrong) So, essentially, the Supreme Court ignored any concerning law, ignored the Constitution itself, and completely overstepped its authority. Isn't the courts job to only interpret pre-existing law?
__________________ ~ No man has ever gone through life without having a scared heart.
Let's put slavery on the ballot while we're at it. Human rights are guaranteed in the constitution which we all obey (and even deify), but let's be sure by having a vote.
Californians have already voted once, in 2000, to reaffirm the 1977 state law that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The 2000 initiative, Proposition 22, was not a constitutional amendment.
This isn't some "liberal activist" court. Six of the seven justices are Republican-appointed.
This isn't some "liberal activist" court. Six of the seven justices are Republican-appointed.
I stand corrected on that.
I still find them to be passing legislation on the bench on this, though. Let the voters vote, or the state pass a law on this. When the court is overturnes the will of the people, it better have some solid legal ground on it. I have yet to hear a legal argument on it, and the court has overstepped its legal grounds.
__________________ ~ No man has ever gone through life without having a scared heart.
Let's put slavery on the ballot while we're at it. Human rights are guaranteed in the constitution which we all obey (and even deify), but let's be sure by having a vote.
Yeehaw!
Though I think allowing gay marrage is the right thing to do, when did it become a "human right?"
__________________ ~ No man has ever gone through life without having a scared heart.
This isn't some "liberal activist" court. Six of the seven justices are Republican-appointed.
Another myth. It turns out most "activist" judges are, in fact, conservative....this case may just show that somewhat. Someone did a study of the USSC and the most "activist" were Scalia and Thomas.
However, I think the court should stay out of it. The legislature voted to have gay marriage into law but Arnold vetoed it...twice I believe. It was also voted against the law by the people. So what do you do? Judges and lawmakers say yes, and the people said no.
I think they should give all rights (tax, estate, children etc etc) to any two people regardless of sex but can call it "marriage" for man/woman and "civil union" for gays. It seems much of this is just semantics....
jom
__________________ Old men's room wall saying: Flush hard, it's a long way to Washington
I still find them to be passing legislation on the bench on this, though. Let the voters vote, or the state pass a law on this. When the court is overturnes the will of the people, it better have some solid legal ground on it. I have yet to hear a legal argument on it, and the court has overstepped its legal grounds.
uh, no.
"But rule by the majority is not necessarily democratic:...In a democratic society, majority rule must be coupled with guarantees of individual human rights that, in turn, serve to protect the rights of minorities--whether ethnic, religious, or political, or simply the losers in the debate over a piece of controversial legislation. The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of all citizens."
Therefore, if the government wishes to establish benefits to heterosexuals for choosing to partner up, then they can not deny those same benefits to homosexuals.
Though I think allowing gay marrage is the right thing to do, when did it become a "human right?"
There are certain "rights" defined by marriage that are unavailable to same sex couples. Simple things like being the beneficiary of a person, for instance. Hell, just the ability to make health decisions, or even visiting someone in the hospital.
There are certain "rights" defined by marriage that are unavailable to same sex couples. Simple things like being the beneficiary of a person, for instance. Hell, just the ability to make health decisions, or even visiting someone in the hospital.
There were also some blacks that had to carry papers to prove that they had been freed to. It makes al bit more sense to me that everyone should just have the same rights without having to "prove it" or jump through more legal hoops.
There were also some blacks that had to carry papers to prove that they had been freed to. It makes al bit more sense to me that everyone should just have the same rights without having to "prove it" or jump through more legal hoops.
CA Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban 
SmytheKing
