SUBSCRIBE | NEWSLETTERS | MAPS | VIDEOS | BLOGS | MARKETPLACE | CONTESTS
TRY BACKPACKER FREE!
SUBSCRIBE NOW and get
2 Free Issues and 3 Free Gifts!
Full Name:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email: (required)
If I like it and decide to continue, I'll pay just $12.00, and receive a full one-year subscription (9 issues in all), a 73% savings off the newsstand price! If for any reason I decide not to continue, I'll write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing.
Your subscription includes 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Or click here to pay now and get 2 extra issues
Offer valid in US only.


» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Page 1 of 512345>>

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: Delicious Tears, SCOTUS strikes down DOMA & Prop H8< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
TehipiteTom Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5713
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 10:48 am  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

DOMA on substantive grounds, Prop 8 on standing (so it applies only to standing). Big victory for the forces of basic human decency.

And the second best thing about this (after the whole, y'know, equality thing) is the epic meltdown bigots like Todd Starnes and Bryan Fischer are having on the Tweeterwebs.

I feel kind of sorry for them. So I offer them these sympathetic words: suck on THIS, pathetic losers!

Hahahahahahahahahaha.


--------------
Conservatives are the whiniest whiners in the wholy whiny history of whiny-ass whinerdom.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 2
cweston Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mar. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 11:12 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I really don't care about what any pathetic losers have to say about this-it's a great day for our country and I'm not going to let them rain on our parade.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 3
TehipiteTom Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5713
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 11:14 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

It is indeed a great day for our country. (Or maybe, a great day for our country and an especially great day for California.)

But I do love me some Schadenfreude...


--------------
Conservatives are the whiniest whiners in the wholy whiny history of whiny-ass whinerdom.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 4
bigsilk Search for posts by this member.
A different kind of rebel...
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1179
Joined: Feb. 2012
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 11:18 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I'm a prouder American today, secure in the knowledge that my gay friends are that much closer to sharing the horrors of marriage equally.

--------------
There are only two things I don't like about people: They take too long to cook and taste like crap when they're done.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 5
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 43753
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 11:36 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I'm disappointed the California decision was so narrowly based, standing itself being restricted to that case. Welcomed nevertheless.

The DOMA decision will be interesting to read.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 6
TehipiteTom Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5713
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 11:43 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jun. 26 2013, 8:36 am)
QUOTE
I'm disappointed the California decision was so narrowly based, standing itself being restricted to that case. Welcomed nevertheless.

The DOMA decision will be interesting to read.

In an ideal world I would have preferred a broader (nationwide) ruling on equal protection grounds. I just don't see this Court doing that.

IMO, this was the best outcome we could have hoped for. At least until another justice (say, Scalia or Kennedy) dies or retires.


--------------
Conservatives are the whiniest whiners in the wholy whiny history of whiny-ass whinerdom.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 7
cweston Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mar. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 11:46 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(TehipiteTom @ Jun. 26 2013, 10:43 am)
QUOTE
IMO, this was the best outcome we could have hoped for. At least until another justice (say, Scalia or Kennedy) dies or retires.

I have mixed feelings about that...

Obviously, the marriage equality movement would be helped the most in the short term by a broad ruling like what you describe.

But I think that that would also draw quite a backlash. Ultimately, what's best long-term is for more states to decide fro themselves to adopt marriage equality, although that means that it will still be a long way away in states like mine (Kansas), alas.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 8
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 43753
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 12:06 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(TehipiteTom @ Jun. 26 2013, 8:43 am)
QUOTE

(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jun. 26 2013, 8:36 am)
QUOTE
I'm disappointed the California decision was so narrowly based, standing itself being restricted to that case. Welcomed nevertheless.

The DOMA decision will be interesting to read.

In an ideal world I would have preferred a broader (nationwide) ruling on equal protection grounds. I just don't see this Court doing that.

IMO, this was the best outcome we could have hoped for. At least until another justice (say, Scalia or Kennedy) dies or retires.

On narrow?

Yes, I've read the Windsor summary and the choice of the Fifth Amendment basis to rule there had to be an alignment with New York rather than the 14th likely speaks to a reluctance to go "too far" and instead rule the case as narrow as allowed that still got the job done: eradicating that section of DOMA. It seems from the Perry summary (Kennedy dissented?) that the standing issue was just too blatant, so they took the low hanging fruit.

Though I'd gotten the impression Kennedy was tea-leaved from arguments to want to go further (in Windsor), I wonder who had to be brought on board with the narrower ruling then? But I might just have that wrong.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 9
Three Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1073
Joined: Dec. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 12:42 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(cweston @ Jun. 26 2013, 11:12 am)
QUOTE
I really don't care about what any pathetic losers have to say about this-it's a great day for our country and I'm not going to let them rain on our parade.

So holding to Jesus' description of marriage in Matthew 19 makes one a pathethic loser?

This before anyone even posted objecting to the SCOTUS ruling.

CW did you really mean to introduce an innovation to TPA -preemptive name calling?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 10
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 43753
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 12:49 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Jun. 26 2013, 9:42 am)
QUOTE

(cweston @ Jun. 26 2013, 11:12 am)
QUOTE
I really don't care about what any pathetic losers have to say about this-it's a great day for our country and I'm not going to let them rain on our parade.

So holding to Jesus' description of marriage in Matthew 19 makes one a pathethic loser?
......

No more than utilizing the coercive force of government to enforce mandatory once a week ritual cannibalism would. And no less.

Not about the holding, it's about the forcing on others who are NOT members of your particular belief group.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 11
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 43753
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 1:26 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

As a Republican Houe member is about to try again.


"“My response to this will be later this week to file a federal marriage amendment,” he said at a Conversation with Conservatives lunch on Wednesday morning."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story....LPBYTrE
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 12
Trinity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 522
Joined: Feb. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 1:27 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Jun. 26 2013, 12:42 pm)
QUOTE
So holding to Jesus' description of marriage in Matthew 19 makes one a pathethic loser?

I assume that you are in favor of criminalizing divorce?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 13
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 43753
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 1:29 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Trinity @ Jun. 26 2013, 10:27 am)
QUOTE

(Three @ Jun. 26 2013, 12:42 pm)
QUOTE
So holding to Jesus' description of marriage in Matthew 19 makes one a pathethic loser?

I assume that you are in favor of criminalizing divorce?

No! Then where will I be with my beloved 60/40 Sierra Designs Mountain parka? It's not like there's a dearth of stones where I tend to wear that.....
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 14
GoBlueHiker Search for posts by this member.
Obsessive Island Hopper...
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16372
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 1:37 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jun. 26 2013, 11:26 am)
QUOTE
As a Republican Houe member is about to try again.


"“My response to this will be later this week to file a federal marriage amendment,” he said at a Conversation with Conservatives lunch on Wednesday morning."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story....LPBYTrE

Yeah, do your best to alienate more people, that'll go over well.

I don't think this will garner the kind of support they're hoping for, with a mindset still stuck decades behind the times.  Apparently conservative Republicans haven't noticed, but there's been a fundamental shift in the way many Americans feel about gay marriage.  Do they really think the states that have voted it in are going to suddenly decide to repeal it again?


--------------
Wealth needs more.  Happiness needs less.  Simplify.

www.RainForestTreks.com
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 15
cweston Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mar. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 1:38 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Jun. 26 2013, 11:42 am)
QUOTE
So holding to Jesus' description of marriage in Matthew 19 makes one a pathethic loser?

This before anyone even posted objecting to the SCOTUS ruling.

CW did you really mean to introduce an innovation to TPA -preemptive name calling?

Are you serious?

I was quoting the OP in this thread. You know, the post immediately above mine?
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 16
Trinity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 522
Joined: Feb. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 1:48 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jun. 26 2013, 1:29 pm)
QUOTE
No! Then where will I be with my beloved 60/40 Sierra Designs Mountain parka? It's not like there's a dearth of stones where I tend to wear that.....

Ha!  Nor will there be any dearth of those ready to cast the first one!  Oops, I think there might be something in the bible about that too....
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 17
Lamebeaver Search for posts by this member.
trail? I don't need no stinkin trail!
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 19340
Joined: Aug. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 2:29 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Seems to me this decision was more about legal protocol (who gets to appeal) than it was about the actual issue in proposition 8.

But if you want to celebrate, go right ahead.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 18
cweston Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mar. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 2:31 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Lamebeaver @ Jun. 26 2013, 1:29 pm)
QUOTE
Seems to me this decision was more about legal protocol (who gets to appeal) than it was about the actual issue in proposition 8.

But if you want to celebrate, go right ahead.

That's true of the Prop 8 case, but not of the DOMA case.

The crux of the opinion in overturning DOMA, IMHO, was this statement:

QUOTE
The Constitution's guarantee of equality must at the very least mean that a bare congressional desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot justify disparate treatment of that group.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 19
Three Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1073
Joined: Dec. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 2:34 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(cweston @ Jun. 26 2013, 1:38 pm)
QUOTE

(Three @ Jun. 26 2013, 11:42 am)
QUOTE
So holding to Jesus' description of marriage in Matthew 19 makes one a pathethic loser?

This before anyone even posted objecting to the SCOTUS ruling.

CW did you really mean to introduce an innovation to TPA -preemptive name calling?

Are you serious?

I was quoting the OP in this thread. You know, the post immediately above mine?

I apologize CW.  TT I also apologize to you for not giving you the credit for the preemptive name calling innovation.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 20
TehipiteTom Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5713
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 2:40 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Three @ Jun. 26 2013, 11:34 am)
QUOTE

(cweston @ Jun. 26 2013, 1:38 pm)
QUOTE

(Three @ Jun. 26 2013, 11:42 am)
QUOTE
So holding to Jesus' description of marriage in Matthew 19 makes one a pathethic loser?

This before anyone even posted objecting to the SCOTUS ruling.

CW did you really mean to introduce an innovation to TPA -preemptive name calling?

Are you serious?

I was quoting the OP in this thread. You know, the post immediately above mine?

I apologize CW.  TT I also apologize to you for not giving you the credit for the preemptive name calling innovation.

Thanks. It takes a big man to admit he was wrong.

--------------
Conservatives are the whiniest whiners in the wholy whiny history of whiny-ass whinerdom.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 21
TehipiteTom Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5713
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 2:52 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

The most delicious tears of all, of course, are Nino Scalia's:
QUOTE
But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to con- demn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution. In the majority's judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to "dis- parage," "injure," "degrade," "demean," and "humiliate" our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homo- sexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence— indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.

Now, I have it on good authority that Scalia is, in fact, an enemy of the human race. That aside, though, the overwhelming self-pity on display here is truly exquisite.


--------------
Conservatives are the whiniest whiners in the wholy whiny history of whiny-ass whinerdom.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 22
nogods Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6332
Joined: Sep. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 3:19 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Scalia has become an angry old judge who writes dissent that say nothing more than the equivalent of "get off my lawn!"

Laurence H. Tribe mocks mocks him in a post on SCOTUSBlog

QUOTE
But Justice Scalia – in a portion of his dissent that Chief Justice Roberts conspicuously declined to join – couldn’t resist the temptation to use the occasion to insult the Court’s majority, and Justice Kennedy in particular, in essentially ad hominem (and ad feminem) terms. I write this comment principally to highlight the extraordinary character of this particularly vitriolic and internally inconsistent dissent.

Having disagreed with the majority about the existence of a live case or controversy within the meaning of Article III (inasmuch as the United States did not appeal the lower court’s invalidation of the relevant federal statute), Justice Scalia went out of his way to opine at great length and with his characteristic vigor about how the Court should have decided the very controversy that he says wasn’t really before it, offering his view of the merits without the modesty that he insisted was the hallmark of proper adjudication. To accuse the majority of arrogance and then reach the merits after saying that the Court lacks jurisdiction to address the case requires no small dose of chutzpah.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 23
buddero Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1142
Joined: Jan. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 3:23 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

From a recent post in my journal:

Hangin’ on a corner in The Castro, watching all the pretty people passing by and these immortal words from Bob Dylan running through my mind: “Equality, I spoke the word as if a wedding vow." Not really thinking so much of the equality of marriage equality, but the equality of being free, the equality of being free to love openly, free to be real and happy, free To Be.

This is a great day. I've been moved to tears more than once on this day.


--------------
Reach out your hand, if your cup be empty
If your cup is full, may it be again

Journal and links to refugees, backpacking, travel in Asia, photos, honky-tonk angels, other beautiful things...
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 24
hbfa Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 8300
Joined: Feb. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 26 2013, 4:08 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Thinking people continue to evolve, some slower than others.

This ruling supporting equality and fairness was inevitable.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 25
2PawsRiver Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 310
Joined: Jul. 2008
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 27 2013, 6:40 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Wonder what will be next, children or animals.........though I guess one could adopt the 8 year old they are in love with.............and you could always eat that chicken you love to become united, though I guess technically you would only be united for a while, until you burn off those calories and have a good bowel movement

My advice to animal lovers would be, until marriage to animals becomes legal don't eat them, or love a lot of chickens, pigs, sheep, horses or whatever, at the same time. Though I think smaller animals would make more sense. Will be interesting to see which vets will recognize Blue Cross for the vet bills.

Marrying that child you love could be a little trickier. Not only would the marriage laws have to be modified, but they may also have to take a look at age of consent, possibly parental consent, even the incest laws are a bit tricky. Though I guess by the time we reach this point, things like incest and pedophilia will have already been accepted.

Will take a few more years, but if I had to guess which will come first, I would say children, I would imagine one could get more for their child then they could their chicken.


--------------
www.MarkandSharonLundin.com
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 26
nogods Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6332
Joined: Sep. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 27 2013, 8:06 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

One who doesn't know the difference between sex by consenting adults and sex with a child or animal incapable of granting consent, probably shouldn't be having sex themselves rather than worrying about someone procreating with chickens.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 27
2PawsRiver Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 310
Joined: Jul. 2008
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 27 2013, 8:15 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

One who does not understand the definition of "Procreating" should not use it in a post. :)

--------------
www.MarkandSharonLundin.com
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 28
BillBab Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5282
Joined: Sep. 2008
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 27 2013, 8:20 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Lamebeaver @ Jun. 26 2013, 2:29 pm)
QUOTE
Seems to me this decision was more about legal protocol (who gets to appeal) than it was about the actual issue in proposition 8.

But if you want to celebrate, go right ahead.


Exactly right

DOMA ruling did not support gay marriage....it supported states Rights


As far as Prop 8

CA state officials effectively vetoed the electorate and when the proponents of Prop 8 tried to do their job for them they crossed a legal line

This has more to do with the PTB  nullifying ballot initiatives that do not go "their way" than gay marriage

See what we do is.....we let the poor suckers have their vote but then we just ignore the will of the people for their own good

for the headline readers here is the cliff notes version....nobody ruled that Prop 8 was unconstitutional

Don't feel bad....I am sure you are the same folks that thought the VRA ruling means black folks cannot vote any more....even the great Constitutional Scholar BHO appears to have missed that one as well  :laugh:


--------------
"Asking liberals where wages and prices come from is like asking six-year-olds where babies come from."

Thomas Sowell
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 29
TehipiteTom Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5713
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 27 2013, 8:52 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(2PawsRiver @ Jun. 27 2013, 3:40 am)
QUOTE
Wonder what will be next, children or animals.........

Like many "conservatives", you seem to be unclear on the concept of consent.

--------------
Conservatives are the whiniest whiners in the wholy whiny history of whiny-ass whinerdom.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 30
TehipiteTom Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5713
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 27 2013, 8:56 am Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE


(BillBab @ Jun. 27 2013, 5:20 am)
QUOTE
DOMA ruling did not support gay marriage....it supported states Rights

Setting aside the rest of your ignorant rant...this is exactly wrong: if you read Kennedy's opinion, he makes it abundantly clear that this is a ruling against discrimination, not a "states' rights" ruling.

ETA:
QUOTE
Seems to me this decision was more about legal protocol (who gets to appeal) than it was about the actual issue in proposition 8.

But if you want to celebrate, go right ahead.

No, it doesn't endorse marriage equality for the nation. But the practical effect is that we'll have it in California. This has a real impact on real people...and that's definitely worth celebrating.


--------------
Conservatives are the whiniest whiners in the wholy whiny history of whiny-ass whinerdom.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
143 replies since Jun. 26 2013, 10:48 am < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


Page 1 of 512345>>
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply Delicious Tears
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code



Get 2 FREE Trial Issues and 3 FREE GIFTS
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
The Best Trails in America
YES! Please send me my FREE trial issues of Backpacker
and my 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Full Name:
City:
Address 1:
Zip Code:
State:
Address 2:
Email (required):
Free trial offer valid for US subscribers only. Canadian subscriptions | International subscriptions