Prop 8 in California is Struck Down By Judge Walker

Craig makes a very valid point David, your response please

 

I guess I miss your point? What does it matter who appointed the guy?
As I have stated, my problem is with the fact that the measure was put to a vote for the people of CA to decide, yet when the vote didn't come out the way they expected one individual (who apparently had a personal stake in the issue) was allowed to overturn the will of the people. Obviously I'm a states rights guy and I'm not sure the Constitution allows the federal government jurisdiction over this issue. It has been my understanding that if this power isn't specifically granted to the fed then it is for the individual state to decide- and it seems like the state had decided.

 

What, are you the forum referee or emcee now?

 

Don't bother arguing with the king of personal attacks. If he thinks that citizen’s rights should be put up for a vote even if they violate the Constitution, the people must be right and the heck with the rights afforded to all citizens of this country. The backers of this proposition, the Mormons, may find that their rights are up for a vote some time down the road, then where will David and his fanatical cult be? LOL!

 

I just dont think Reagan was the kind of person to appoint a liberal. Or H W either. And what does personal stake mean? If you had a personal stake in an injustice, wouldnt you try to right it? According to your theory; if CA. voted to keep Chinese out of the state, it should be adhered to and the federal govt. should not intervene by blocking this clearly stupid new law. And how come you side with the ''will of the people'' on this, but think that the will that elected Obama were mindless jackballs who fell into some sort of stupor at the polls? I guess you dont agree with the lifting of the ban on inter-racial marriage in certasin states(southern) either. Because the law prohibiting that was struck down by courts also.

 

Well...err....it was put up to vote by the state of California though, wasn't it? Maybe the Mormons did back the prop, it was ULTIMATELY the people who voted, correct? It's simple, CA is run by liberal elites, does anyone doubt that? Whether it's politicians, entertainers, old hippies, whatever...they were confident their side would win. But it didn't! The people spoke and these other interests had to scramble.
Is it really such an odd concept that the people of the state should decide an issue pertaining to that state's affairs?

 

Well, I guess you were wrong then, weren't you?

 

Oh brother. And you accuse others of copping out? Be honest. I gave you other examples, so do you think inter-racial marriages(which is kinda like this issue) should have remained illegal? Or was it right, for the sake of equality, that a judge deemed it unconstitional? And do you think that because the masses vote to discriminate against a certain group, that group should have no recourse?

 

I agree with Judge Walkers ruling.

As a straight man, I dont believe government should be at all involved in this. Marraige is between 2 people and their church.

Since when is there 11 Commandments? As far as I see, homosexulity was not on Moses tablets........keep the goverment out of our private lives !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Good points jack! However as a straight married man, I was married by a judge and the ceremony had nothing to do with any religious belief, no church, no faith. In the absence of such beliefs, the government is the only other entity that is available to formally untie to people.

 

No I do not, but I still think matters should be decided by the people on as local a basis as possible. If a town or a state wants to pass a measure that is discriminatory, let 'em do it. I don't have to go there, you don't have to go there. If they are that stupid let 'em have their way & see what happens.

Individuals, not the federal government, should be the purveyors of equality...it can't be forced on you. Heck, let a state pass all the racist laws they want. What will happen? All the racists will flock there & you and I won't have to deal with them. Right? As for recourse? Avoid the places whose politics or social sensibilities don't agree with yours. I think it's pretty basic but everyone wants to make these things harder than they really are. If the majority of CA residents don't want gay marriage, so be it. Like-minded people can move there & share in their feelings. Gay couples can move to a state that is more accomodating or work to get the people of the state to change their minds.

 

So your view is that the emancipation proclamation should have never been enacted? Since you think individuals and not the government should interfere with opression. Ya know, what is right never changes. Even from state to state.

 

Slavery is a bit different than social issues such as recognizing gay marriage, don't ya think? Maybe?

 

Well you certainly think I am David when you ask me to remind others to answer YOUR QUESTIONS or does it only work when YOU ask David? I am fully entitled to comment if I so wish I do not have to gain permission from you to do so LOL

 

If a town or a state wants to pass a measure that is discriminatory, let 'em do it. Are you for real David?? do you honestly believe this, what if they decided to legalise child prostitution or re introduce slavery you ok with it as long as you dont have to visit!!

 

They could introduce a measure making you "king of the world" but do you really think that is going to happen? The silliness from you & craig is distracting from the topic the rest of us are seriously discussing.

 

Oh you mean an "individual"....like the "individual" as legally defined for corporations???

 

Hardly sillyness David they were your words so one has to take them seriously or is everything you write too be taken in the same context? So stop trying to wriggle out of what you said

 

I'm not wriggling out of anything. You two are just being...well...yourselves.

 

Direct quotations from David LOL

funny how a direct quote, in context can be called "spin". Have you ever noticed that a direct quote from a far out lib is always the best ammunition to use against them?

You just keep backing up & backing away from your own words, don't you?