I will talk as soon as you stop spouting stupid rhetoric and say something relevant
random thoughts Send a noteboard - 06/08/2010 07:54:09 PM
if you don't want to talk about it, that's fine. but don't pretend that you know what you're talking about when you make a statement like you did. we have three branches of government for a reason. if you don't like it, you'll have to campaign to have the constitution changed to suit your needs. good luck with that.
When did I ever imply that we don't have three branches of government? Maybe if you stopped for a second and thought for yourself you could come up with something actually that refuted an argument I was making but silly cookie cutter left wing nut job replies won't cut it.
Judge rules California's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional
04/08/2010 10:40:50 PM
- 1364 Views
Good news, but as the article says, it'll go all the way to the SC.
04/08/2010 10:55:58 PM
- 714 Views
So then is that how we do it?
04/08/2010 11:01:19 PM
- 839 Views
Of course.
04/08/2010 11:04:59 PM
- 746 Views
His point was
04/08/2010 11:40:14 PM
- 894 Views
Yeah but: What Ghavrel said below *NM*
05/08/2010 08:01:02 AM
- 433 Views
And again...
05/08/2010 06:08:56 PM
- 593 Views
To quote my property professor: "Can I make you think like a Californian?"
05/08/2010 06:39:48 PM
- 665 Views
I'm not the one who came up with the referendum system, you do realize.
04/08/2010 11:11:13 PM
- 736 Views
The referendum system, in my opinion, has been a failure, especially in CA.
04/08/2010 11:46:21 PM
- 820 Views
democracy has been a failure in CA.
05/08/2010 02:42:21 PM
- 605 Views
No. It just shows the problems of a crazy electorate.
05/08/2010 03:29:21 PM
- 722 Views
we vote fro way to much crap in general
05/08/2010 02:41:19 PM
- 665 Views
Yes, you still have to abide by the Constitution, even if a lot of people don't like it. *NM*
05/08/2010 12:07:44 AM
- 386 Views
Amend the Constitution to alter the Fourteenth Amendment if you don't like it. *NM*
05/08/2010 01:09:51 AM
- 446 Views
just a devil's advocate position here, but....
05/08/2010 04:23:43 AM
- 744 Views
Marriage is either an economic status regulated by law or a religious institution.
05/08/2010 05:13:17 AM
- 777 Views
There are certain things that should not be decided by a vote...
05/08/2010 02:02:45 AM
- 731 Views
I do agree with you on that. Hell yes, and on a subject like this in particular.
05/08/2010 02:17:24 AM
- 787 Views
Re: I do agree with you on that. Hell yes, and on a subject like this in particular.
05/08/2010 10:46:54 AM
- 779 Views
I understand it.
05/08/2010 03:06:40 PM
- 762 Views
I know you don't support proposition 8
05/08/2010 03:29:34 PM
- 749 Views
05/08/2010 03:34:01 PM
- 786 Views
But that is just simplistic and silly to complain about when it is a long standing possibility
05/08/2010 03:46:59 PM
- 669 Views
Oh, ees it?
05/08/2010 04:07:39 PM
- 807 Views
Well they knew the rules before they started the whole thing
05/08/2010 04:12:33 PM
- 646 Views
Why would you complain if you won?
05/08/2010 04:15:20 PM
- 736 Views
You could recognise that you won by the system working in a way you don't like?
05/08/2010 04:23:58 PM
- 618 Views
I'm sure that happens, in general.
06/08/2010 02:43:18 PM
- 603 Views
It seems to happen a lot nowadays
06/08/2010 03:06:33 PM
- 637 Views
It's so weird that you feel differently - there is only room for one opinion here!
06/08/2010 03:41:52 PM
- 563 Views
instead it should be decided by judges who answer to no one? *NM*
05/08/2010 07:12:59 AM
- 389 Views
The same judges who upheld our private right to bear arms.
05/08/2010 02:09:07 PM
- 766 Views
not when judges stop using the Constitution
05/08/2010 02:30:51 PM
- 740 Views
Sexual preference is not the right being protected.
05/08/2010 03:22:04 PM
- 810 Views
I know that the 14th amendment is routinely used in ways it was never intended.
05/08/2010 05:25:07 PM
- 720 Views
I realize that, but it is ultimately a good thing.
05/08/2010 05:31:19 PM
- 792 Views
let's take away the citizenship of all black people if that's the way you think
05/08/2010 09:06:23 PM
- 648 Views
Come now lets not be stupid
06/08/2010 05:31:18 PM
- 614 Views
sorry but your statement was completely ignorant.
06/08/2010 07:27:09 PM
- 734 Views
I will talk as soon as you stop spouting stupid rhetoric and say something relevant
06/08/2010 07:54:09 PM
- 698 Views
Let's just be clear about which amendment is which.
05/08/2010 11:50:57 PM
- 613 Views
but that still ignores intent and expands the law in ways not intnented when it created
06/08/2010 04:53:43 AM
- 673 Views
Yes, no, no, and no.
06/08/2010 05:29:09 AM
- 707 Views
there are serious flaws in your thinking here
06/08/2010 06:18:13 PM
- 788 Views
Your assertions continue to lack support.
06/08/2010 07:23:17 PM
- 815 Views
not all you just refuse to see things you disagree with
06/08/2010 08:36:32 PM
- 783 Views
...said the pot to the kettle
06/08/2010 09:17:28 PM
- 851 Views
yes but a shiny stainless steel pot
09/08/2010 11:21:33 PM
- 898 Views
You continue to be wrong about history and the role of courts.
10/08/2010 01:05:39 AM
- 1244 Views
If he's wrong, a lot of law scholars and Supreme Court Justices are wrong.
10/08/2010 01:44:05 AM
- 701 Views
Brown vs. Board of Education, 'nuff said. *NM*
10/08/2010 04:32:37 AM
- 385 Views
Actually, that only proves his point, if I understand correctly. *NM*
10/08/2010 11:11:19 AM
- 413 Views
part oif the problem appears to be you completely missing the point
10/08/2010 01:23:19 PM
- 915 Views
There's a simple way to determine the degree to which that opinion is objective or subjective...
06/08/2010 09:32:21 PM
- 648 Views
Since when is marriage a right? *NM*
05/08/2010 04:11:16 PM
- 375 Views
it may not be a "right"...
05/08/2010 04:22:44 PM
- 649 Views
It's a benefit that is being extended selectively to one set of the populace.
05/08/2010 04:52:52 PM
- 732 Views
Hey, I'm single....
05/08/2010 05:05:41 PM
- 645 Views
That's a specious argument and you know it.
05/08/2010 05:13:17 PM
- 718 Views
A homosexual has every opportunity as well.....
05/08/2010 05:23:56 PM
- 664 Views
Oh quit the bullshit already.
05/08/2010 05:29:15 PM
- 865 Views
Sorry, but what a nonsense.
05/08/2010 09:27:17 PM
- 633 Views
hey that's it, jens! you solved the WHOLE PROBLEM!!!
05/08/2010 11:24:29 PM
- 767 Views
ON TO WORLD HUNGER!
06/08/2010 07:59:51 AM
- 660 Views
LET THEM HAVE CAEK. *NM*
06/08/2010 02:29:56 PM
- 355 Views
Are you sure it's wise to feed people on a lie? *NM*
06/08/2010 02:34:26 PM
- 447 Views
People are fed lies all the time
06/08/2010 09:30:37 PM
- 641 Views
Quite so, but I don't think it's commonly a mainstay of their diet *NM*
06/08/2010 09:50:33 PM
- 385 Views
It is the only thing which is abundant enough for everyone to have some... *NM*
06/08/2010 10:01:44 PM
- 626 Views
I invite you to read the judge's conclusions, linked again inside.
05/08/2010 11:43:44 PM
- 750 Views
Since 1948
06/08/2010 04:01:02 AM
- 855 Views
gah. can. only. see. typo. *NM*
06/08/2010 03:43:21 PM
- 345 Views
I don't see any typo... *NM*
06/08/2010 04:07:18 PM
- 402 Views
I agree
05/08/2010 07:22:17 AM
- 723 Views
And Civil Rights lost the Democrats the South.
05/08/2010 03:44:56 PM
- 735 Views
but it was done by congress passing laws and the president signing those laws
05/08/2010 04:20:19 PM
- 683 Views
I was under the impression that the supreme court had a role in it
05/08/2010 04:31:51 PM
- 660 Views
but the court was not over turning the laws passed by congress
05/08/2010 05:11:06 PM
- 706 Views
No, like in this case, isn't it?
05/08/2010 05:24:19 PM
- 653 Views
I would say that is another case of judicial activism and shows the danger of the practice
05/08/2010 05:43:02 PM
- 620 Views
Hard to believe it's the same governor who said "Gay marriage should be between a man and a woman." *NM*
04/08/2010 11:05:45 PM
- 459 Views
Link to the full court order inside:
04/08/2010 11:43:29 PM
- 845 Views
The judge quoting Scalia in favour of gay marriage is fairly amusing.
04/08/2010 11:50:47 PM
- 723 Views
What page was that on?
05/08/2010 11:25:49 AM
- 639 Views
Nah, it was way above page 109, in the findings of fact somewhere.
05/08/2010 12:37:48 PM
- 743 Views
Oh, that is brilliant.
05/08/2010 01:12:21 PM
- 648 Views
Pretty much.
05/08/2010 01:44:22 PM
- 774 Views
I've always wondered what basis there is for banning necrophilia if "it's disgusting" is invalid.
05/08/2010 01:51:19 PM
- 722 Views
because you cannot give consent when you are dead?
05/08/2010 03:04:46 PM
- 711 Views
what if you give consent while you are still alive?
05/08/2010 03:21:59 PM
- 812 Views
Is it then illegal?
05/08/2010 03:23:46 PM
- 730 Views
given I imagine the pro-necrophilia lobby isn't strong in numbers or influence
05/08/2010 03:33:11 PM
- 783 Views
Re: given I imagine the pro-necrophilia lobby isn't strong in numbers or influence
05/08/2010 03:34:57 PM
- 825 Views
I would think it would be illegal even then
05/08/2010 03:34:31 PM
- 743 Views
Wikipedia to the rescue!
05/08/2010 04:20:15 PM
- 870 Views
you would hope the other states would cover it under improper treatmentof human remains
05/08/2010 07:38:59 PM
- 689 Views
A dead body is just an object, not a person with rights.
05/08/2010 03:27:08 PM
- 732 Views
Yes, but
06/08/2010 08:42:05 AM
- 685 Views
Absolutely not.
06/08/2010 03:21:14 PM
- 738 Views
not to mention necrophilia has a large potential to be hazardous to health.
06/08/2010 09:42:43 PM
- 785 Views
Irrelevant decision.....this was heading to SCOTUS from day 1 *NM*
05/08/2010 12:53:26 AM
- 413 Views