Actually it makes no noise so it is a light LOL
Posted on 08/04/2010 1:45:48 PM PDT by tsmith130
Court enjoins enforcement of Prop 8... Will be released at 2 pm pt...
Judge strikes down 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California'..
How many times can the government subvert the will of the people in a so-called democratic society before the people stand up and do something about it?
Judges and the current administration are destroying this country. November can’t come quickly enough, but I fear even that will be too little, too late.
ROTFLMAO!
Will there be throngs of Prop 8 supports flooding the streets and throwing a tantrum tonight?
Actually it makes no noise so it is a light LOL
Many voters do not equate homosexual marriage to dems. This is due to the fact many dems openly deny supporting homosexual marriages (Of course, they wink, wink, which many voters do not pick up).
Also add to the fact that the Judge who overturned Prop 8 was appointed by a Repub President (Correct me if I am wrong).
How will you equate the democrat Party with this decision? (Dems will cover and say “We must respect the process etc...”)
The case for civil marriage between a man and a woman in a nutshell:
http://stumpedagain.wordpress.com/marriage-not-so-gay/
Probably. Consenting adults and all ...
Why not a Man and 6 year old while we are at it!?
Minors can't consent for themselves. You know, except in the cases of whether or not they want their parents to know they're having sex and killing babies.
Then bestiality following close behind.
I got an error message. Apparently, I’m ‘FORBIDDEN’ to access whatever it is. ;o)
This ruling a travesty handed down by an avowed and unrepentant queer judge. It is 100% certain that Walker’s ruling will be overturned. He had no right to push his sexual perversion on the whole state.
Its the slippery slope again. Government assigns an automatic legal status to marriage (like a contract) then government confers perks on those that engage in that legal status (tax deductions, social security benefits etc.) then the courts rule everyone must be allowed to engage in that legal status under the equal protection clause.
Social engineering at its finest and a perfect example of the law of unintended consequences.
“This will make more people in this country turn against the liberal judges.”
And the result of that is?
No, this decision only applies to this particular statute. And, a District Court decision IS NOT precedent for other courts, in fact it's not even precedent for this court - just these plaintiffs and these questions of law.
For this to have precedential value nationally, it will have to be affirmed by the Supreme Court.
If the courts impose gay marriage and make it the law of the land, I’d fully and unflinchingly start supporting secession.
JUDGE: PROPOSITION 8 DOES NOT SURVIVE RATIONAL BASIS....
JUDGE: Having considered the trial evidence and the arguments of counsel, the court pursuant to FRCP 52(a) finds that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional and that its enforcement must be enjoined.
'Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians'...
'Stereotypes and misinformation have resulted in social and legal disadvantages for gays and lesbians'...
JUDGE: THE RIGHT TO MARRY PROTECTS AN INDIVIDUAL’S CHOICE OF MARITAL PARTNER REGARDLESS OF GENDER...
DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS DO NOT SATISFY CALIFORNIA’S OBLIGATION TO ALLOW PLAINTIFFS TO MARRY..
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.