this is great for Bas, and Clovis!


j/k guys there had to be some digg in here somewhere

quote:

Originally posted by BLOWZO this is great for Bas, and Clovis! j/k guys there had to be some digg in here somewhere

Don't worry, you're about the 8th person to say this.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Seplling don't demonstrate intelligence and educatoin - knowing does.

quote:

Originally posted by djjoshuaallen i wonder, would you guys get upset if a court was able to make abortion illegal if the will of the people had just voted in favor of legal abortions? I know id be furious I am not against gay marriage, just against activist judges using their legal position to forward their own agendas'. If we allow this, it could get ugly. Just because we are in favor of the outcome, doesnt mean we should be ok with the process in which it came about

activist judges, lol... this is just the kind of ignorance conservatives rely on to charge their base. if "the people" voted on a ban against interracial marriage and the supreme court ruled that ban was unconstitutional, would you be singing the same tune? or would you argue that the judges are doing their job by interpreting what is legally enforceable according to the state constitution? your abortion analogy is flawed for the simple fact that banning abortion is yet another theft of civil liberty while yesterday's ruling is an affirmation of it.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by djjoshuaallen i wonder, would you guys get upset if a court was able to make abortion illegal if the will of the people had just voted in favor of legal abortions? I know id be furious I am not against gay marriage, just against activist judges using their legal position to forward their own agendas'. If we allow this, it could get ugly. Just because we are in favor of the outcome, doesnt mean we should be ok with the process in which it came about

The California legislature passed bills that legalized gay marriage twice. (Republican) Arnold vetoed both times claiming it's up to the (conservative) court to decide about the constitutionality of the ban. How is this "judicial activism"?

___________________
Paul

quote:

Originally posted by djjoshuaallen i wonder, would you guys get upset if a court was able to make abortion illegal if the will of the people had just voted in favor of legal abortions? I know id be furious I am not against gay marriage, just against activist judges using their legal position to forward their own agendas'. If we allow this, it could get ugly. Just because we are in favor of the outcome, doesnt mean we should be ok with the process in which it came about

LOL. You cannot be serious. Activist judges? No, they are just doing the right thing.

quote:

Originally posted by R!CH activist judges, lol... this is just the kind of ignorance conservatives rely on to charge their base. if "the people" voted on a ban against interracial marriage and the supreme court ruled that ban was unconstitutional, would you be singing the same tune?

you dont get my point. If the people voted to ALLOW gay marriage and a supreme court had ruled that unconstitutional i would be singing the same tune and think the court was wrong, it has not much to do with the ISSUE but the PROCESS.

Anyway, i think most would agree that this will probably be short lived anyway, and unfortunatly isnt much of a victory for the gay community

quote:

Originally posted by djjoshuaallen you dont get my point. If the people voted to ALLOW gay marriage and a supreme court had ruled that unconstitutional i would be singing the same tune and think the court was wrong, it has not much to do with the ISSUE but the PROCESS. Anyway, i think most would agree that this will probably be short lived anyway, and unfortunatly isnt much of a victory for the gay community

the process is sound, it works the way it was designed to work by its authors. just because the majority decides one thing by voter initiative doesn't mean their decision is even constitutional to begin with. when you talk about banning things, the issue of constitutionality immediately arises. when you talk about allowing things, there is no issue of constitutionality, only social acceptance. the constitution exists to protect rights, not traditions. for all the state is and should be concerned, marriage is a legal contract between two people. it is not some divine union that should be religiously defined as between man and woman. the issue here boils down to religious discrimination and separation of church from state.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by R!CH the process is sound, it works the way it was designed to work by its authors. just because the majority decides one thing by voter initiative doesn't mean their decision is even constitutional to begin with. when you talk about banning things, the issue of constitutionality immediately arises. when you talk about allowing things, there is no issue of constitutionality, only social acceptance. the constitution exists to protect rights, not traditions. for all the state is and should be concerned, marriage is a legal contract between two people. it is not some divine union that should be religiously defined as between man and woman. the issue here boils down to religious discrimination and separation of church from state.

what about ganja!!!

___________________
Jaded, old fart is me.

quote:

Originally posted by 72hrpartyanimal what about ganja!!!

there are a lot of laws and institutions in this country that are blatantly unconstitutional. drug laws are amongst the worst. the history of every drug law in this country is grounded in racism and discrimination and has nothing to do with public health and safety. the marihuana tax act was designed to push mexican migrant workers out of the south and protect tobacco. the controlled substances act basically took the power to regulate drugs out of the hands of congress and into the hands of an illegal institution known as the dea. the dea has the power to ban any drug for any reason whether it's true or not.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by R!CH there are a lot of laws and institutions in this country that are blatantly unconstitutional. drug laws are amongst the worst. the history of every drug law in this country is grounded in racism and discrimination and has nothing to do with public health and safety. the marihuana tax act was designed to push mexican migrant workers out of the south and protect tobacco. the controlled substances act basically took the power to regulate drugs out of the hands of congress and into the hands of an illegal institution known as the dea. the dea has the power to ban any drug for any reason whether it's true or not.

craziness!!! fuck the DEA! they're some crooked ass bitches.

___________________
Jaded, old fart is me.

quote:

Originally posted by R!CH there are a lot of laws and institutions in this country that are blatantly unconstitutional. drug laws are amongst the worst. the history of every drug law in this country is grounded in racism and discrimination and has nothing to do with public health and safety. the marihuana tax act was designed to push mexican migrant workers out of the south and protect tobacco. the controlled substances act basically took the power to regulate drugs out of the hands of congress and into the hands of an illegal institution known as the dea. the dea has the power to ban any drug for any reason whether it's true or not.

there goes rich, injecting "substance" and "style" into yet another thread, thanks bud