1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

California judge rules ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Piotr Rasputin, Aug 4, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    I wish it were legal in all 50 states - one because it should be and two because it means the lunatic fringe from both sides of this silly issue would shut the fuck up and let government get back to perhaps focus on dealing with real problems.
     
  2. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Dear ucacm: The official Library of Congress index title for court rulings/decisions is "judgments." Which sort of begs your question.
     
  3. westcoastvol

    westcoastvol Active Member

    Re: California's Prop 8 ... overturned

    Fantastic news, but the timing sucks.

    Seriously, a lot of gay couples are gonna want to get married right away, and all the caterers and florists are booked solid through the end of the year.
     
  4. Hank_Scorpio

    Hank_Scorpio Active Member

    Re: California's Prop 8 ... overturned

    http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/posts/2864851/
     
  5. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    Yep.
     
  6. ucacm

    ucacm Active Member

    To be honest, she could have said "judgments." It's been several years now. I just know she wouldn't accept "ruling," or any variants of it.
     
  7. hondo

    hondo Well-Known Member

    We should simply scrap referendums, and for that matter, election of public officials and just let the federal judges run the country. No matter what the people of a state decide (Prop 8 in California, the Immigration Law in Arizona) some judge is going to deep-six it. Fuck it. Let them run it all.
     
  8. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member

    Shouldn't strict constructionists be against politicians who want to pick and choose what aspects of the constitution should be applied to the people?
     
  9. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    That checks and balances thing is just beyond you, isn't it, hondo?
     
  10. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    But isn't the judge's thought that the law is unconstitutional? So that would be like letting the people of a state vote on whether to allow, say, people to take the Fifth Amendment in court. Right?
     
  11. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    I'm against anyone - be it judges or politicians - who can't read and follow the constitution. And unfortunately this country is currently being run by both.
     
  12. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    So I assume if the Supreme Court hears this case and overturns this judges decision, you will still be a champion of checks and balances?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page