Skip to comments.
California Supreme Court Backs Gay Marriage
California Supreme Court Webpage ^
| May 15, 2008
| California Supreme Court
Posted on 05/15/2008 10:02:52 AM PDT by NinoFan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360, 361-380, 381-400 ... 601-613 next last
To: NormsRevenge
It’s not only America that is heading into the darkness, it is the world.
361
posted on
05/15/2008 6:36:52 PM PDT
by
huldah1776
( Worthy is the Lamb)
To: NinoFan; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
+
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Add me / Remove me
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
362
posted on
05/15/2008 6:36:59 PM PDT
by
narses
(...the spirit of Trent is abroad once more.)
To: DryFly
‘..the CA Supreme Court is actually very conservative nowadays.”
Voting for gay marriage is conservative in Kalifornia
363
posted on
05/15/2008 6:38:05 PM PDT
by
Rennes Templar
( Never underestimate the difficulty of changing false beliefs by facts.)
To: Antoninus
I think you’ll have a hard time classifying homosexuality as a “sexual fetish” if you look up the definition of “fetish.”
That said, I have known some successful marriages in which sex was a crucial component. Haven’t you?
To: TraditionalistMommy
Have your husband check your processor. Communicating with you is very difficult, you accept no inputs and output the same bad data repeatedly.
Perhaps he can reboot you?
365
posted on
05/15/2008 6:43:35 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
(El Nino is climate, La Nina is weather.)
To: TraditionalistMommy
I do indeed think the issues are genuinely analogous, and remarkably so.Come now, you dont think Im smart. ;)
Well, I sincerely did.
366
posted on
05/15/2008 6:44:12 PM PDT
by
AHerald
("Be faithful to God ... do not bother about the ridicule of the foolish." - St. Pio of Pietrelcina)
To: Kickass Conservative
Moral, religious, traditional, and “culture war” issues aside, can someone point me to a definitive list of the negative repercussions that legalizing gay marriage will have on a fiscal, tax law, and taxpayer-impact level?
To: jwalsh07
Aw, you’re not really resorting to pedestrian ad hominem arguments, are you?
You haven’t been able to demonstrate that the data is bad. Nevertheless, I’m quite sure he would eagerly reboot me if I mentioned it, which is why I most certainly won’t be mentioning it tonight in my tired state.
To: AHerald
Ouch!
The funny thing is, i think you’re too smart NOT to think the issues are genuinely analogous.
To: Almondjoy
Just what is the difference? That Jesus is now in control? Did He not say,”...,I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.
John 5:18-20
The New may have shown us the ultimate love of God, we often fail to see it in the Law, but it does not in any way negate the justice of the Old Testament. Since becoming a parent I see God’s love in the Old Testament much more clearly. Ever wonder why one of the first things we teach our kids is “HOT”? Because we don’t want our children to get burned. Just like God.
370
posted on
05/15/2008 6:54:21 PM PDT
by
huldah1776
( Worthy is the Lamb)
To: CholeraJoe
Oh. I'm sorry for my assumption. Besides, it should have been “bigamist” anyway.
371
posted on
05/15/2008 6:54:47 PM PDT
by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a 2nd BCT 10th Mountain Soldier home after 15 months in the Triangle of death)
To: Falcon28
NBC News just called it: A big victory for gay rights! ... WHOSE Gay rights???.. we who are moral and just have had " Gayity" stripped FROM OUR VOCABULARY EVEN!!!!!
372
posted on
05/15/2008 7:00:17 PM PDT
by
pollywog
(I will lift mine eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help. My help comes from the Lord...Ps 121)
To: TraditionalistMommy
Have him reboot your sense of humor as well.
373
posted on
05/15/2008 7:00:51 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
(El Nino is climate, La Nina is weather.)
To: NinoFan
That staunch conservative governor of ours will certainly work to get legislation passed against this. /sarcasm
374
posted on
05/15/2008 7:12:43 PM PDT
by
Rockitz
(This isn't rocket science- Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
To: jwalsh07
Oh, he would never do that. He’s a big fan.
Good night!
To: TraditionalistMommy
"The majority refers to the race cases, from which our equal protection jurisprudence has evolved. The analogy does not hold. The civil rights cases banning racial discrimination were based on duly enacted amendments to the United States Constitution, proposed by Congress and ratified by the people through the states. To our nations great shame, many individuals and governmental entities obdurately refused to follow these constitutional imperatives for nearly a century. By overturning Jim Crow and other segregation laws, the courts properly and courageously held the people accountable to their own constitutional mandates. Here the situation is quite different. In less than a decade, through the democratic process, same-sex couples have been given the equal legal rights to which they are entitled.In Perez v. Sharp (1948) 32 Cal.2d 711, we struck down a law prohibiting interracial marriages. The majority places great reliance on the Perez courts statement that the right to marry is the right to join in marriage with the person of ones choice. (Id. at p. 715.) However, Perez and the many other cases establishing the fundamental right to marry were all based on the common understanding of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. (See maj. opn., ante, at pp. 54-63.) The majority recognizes this, as it must. (Id. at p. 66.) Because those cases involved the traditional definition of marriage, they do not support the majoritys analysis. The question here is whether the meaning of the term as it was used in those cases must be changed." Justice Corrigan
She writes better than I do and hopefully you will understand that your analogy fails constitutionally.
376
posted on
05/15/2008 7:15:02 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
(El Nino is climate, La Nina is weather.)
To: NinoFan
To: jwalsh07
The majority determined the analogy does hold. Dissenting judicial opinions are always worth reading, but often the minority opinion for good reason.
To: NinoFan
That’s why I’m not one, too.
379
posted on
05/15/2008 7:27:55 PM PDT
by
darkangel82
(If you're not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. (Say no to RINOs))
To: TraditionalistMommy
Which is exactly why I called you a supporter of judicial activism. Because you are. Fundamental rights have to be fundamental and traditional to qualify as such under constitutional law. Like I said you're a liberal. Liberals support judicial activism because constitutional democracy doesn't suit them. Your smarter than the rest of us and thus your will must be done.
Buenas Noches.
380
posted on
05/15/2008 7:28:43 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
(El Nino is climate, La Nina is weather.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360, 361-380, 381-400 ... 601-613 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson