Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Looks like the only person who knows what they are talking about in this thread is pghquest.
Maybe in your mind, but those of us with a non-biased sense of logic would tend to disagree... keep patting yourselves on the back, though, if it gets you through the day.
For the life of me I cannot understand why people like you get so worked up over this.
It doesn't affect you, you don't lose anything tangible but gays gain a lot. So it's a win, no lose situation. Are you that bitter that you don't want other people to pursue life, liberty and happiness?
I know, right? That's what I don't understand either! I am not personally affected by this law, and it doesn't bother me at all... why on earth WOULD it matter to me/us, if some other happy couple is allowed to marry? I'm beginning to think it's merely an issue of stubbornness, and refusal to admit they are wrong - because there's no other reason to oppose this issue, in terms of logic and law. Silly.
The Court essentially used a bootstrap argument — that since there was a prior right to samesex marriage (based on a California Supreme Court decision which gave rise to Prop. 8 ) — the taking away of that right without justification violated the 14th Amendment. Judge N.R. Smith filed a 39 page dissent from this finding.
Judge Walker should have NEVER been allowed to hear the case in the first place.
How he got away with holding a trial on the intentions and mental state of the proponents is beyond me.
Judge Walker should have NEVER been allowed to hear the case in the first place.
How he got away with holding a trial on the intentions and mental state of the proponents is beyond me.
Well if Judge Walker shouldn't have been allowed to hear the case, neither should a heterosexual be allowed to hear the case. They have an inherent bias as well.
Anyone know of an asexual judge or maybe a eunuch who could hear the case?
Judge Walker should have NEVER been allowed to hear the case in the first place.
How he got away with holding a trial on the intentions and mental state of the proponents is beyond me.
Every single argument they had against gay marriage was effectively shot down. Did you read the transcript? This is why they are in so much fear of the tapes being release. Opponents of gay marriage simply have no foot to stand on because their whole argument is a nonsensical defense of prejudice.
The fact that prop H8ers think Walker should have been removed from the case just illustrates the deep-seated prejudice against gays. Apparently they feel a heterosexual judge as opposed to a gay judge is the only one capable of being fair on issues of marriage. As if only men should rule on issues of women's rights and only whites should preside over issues of minority rights. Talk about being blind to your own hypocrisy.
Judge Walker should have NEVER been allowed to hear the case in the first place.
How he got away with holding a trial on the intentions and mental state of the proponents is beyond me.
So if a heterosexual judge was presiding he'd have been automatically biased against gay marriage? Or is it just gays who are "automatically biased" due to their sexual orientation?
Being White is not being colorless while everyone else is colored. Being Male is not being genderless. And being Hetero is not being absent of sexuality. The status quo is not to be confused with impartiality. EVERYONE belongs to a partial group. Gay marriage foes can't see that.
Every single argument they had against gay marriage was effectively shot down. Did you read the transcript? This is why they are in so much fear of the tapes being release. Opponents of gay marriage simply have no foot to stand on because their whole argument is a nonsensical defense of prejudice.
The fact that prop H8ers think Walker should have been removed from the case just illustrates the deep-seated prejudice against gays. Apparently they feel a heterosexual judge as opposed to a gay judge is the only one capable of being fair on issues of marriage. As if only men should rule on issues of women's rights and only whites should preside over issues of minority rights. Talk about being blind to your own hypocrisy.
Fascinating and yet one of the three disagreed. It'll be overturned.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
