California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban

[hockeybeat]

It was a 4-3 decision.

http://bostonherald.com/news/national/west/view.bg?articleid=1094269&pos=breaking

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Before the rockfight starts, good for them.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

Prediction: Gay people will move to California in droves.

Oh ... wait ... that prediction would be a major d_b.

 

[GB-Hack]

Before the rockfight starts, good for them.

Seconded.

 

[dieditor]

Did the Boston Herald actually see any videotape of the justices announcing or making this decision?

 

[trifectarich]

God save us all.

 

[alleyallen]

Did the Boston Herald actually see any videotape of the justices announcing or making this decision?

Well played.

 

[Yawn]

Once again, a judiciary becomes activist and trumps not only the other branches of government, but the voice of people through their votes.

They can all probably buy BARGAIN, repossessed homes in San Francisco right now, where they'll be welcome with open arms.

 

[alleyallen]

Once again, a judiciary becomes activist and trumps not only the other branches of government, but the voice of people through their votes.

They can all probably buy cheap homes in San Francisco right now, where they'll be welcome with open arms.

That's two different threads on which you've posted this same sentiment. What part of Constitution don't you understand?

 

[Pastor]

I always applaud the adaption of civil rights to all. Well done.

 

[Yawn]

Once again, a judiciary becomes activist and trumps not only the other branches of government, but the voice of people through their votes.

They can all probably buy cheap homes in San Francisco right now, where they'll be welcomed with open arms.

That's two different threads on which you've posted this same sentiment. What part of Constitution don't you understand?

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Did the Boston Herald actually see any videotape of the justices announcing or making this decision?

Man, that's cold.

 

[Yawn]

I always decry the erosion of the collective will of the people to be discarded in favor of judicial meddling.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

I always decry the erosion of the collective will of the people to be discarded in favor of judicial meddling.

So if the collective will of the people wants to prevent a group of American citizens who have a different skin color from voting, or drinking from a water fountain, that is O.K.?

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

I always decry the erosion of the collective will of the people to be discarded in favor of judicial meddling.

The "collective will of the people"?
Please google up the phrase "tyranny of the majority" and get back to us.

 

[Yawn]

So let's see. The will of the people doesn't matter. OK.

So you want to give the GOP back all those congressional seats you picked up in 2006?

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

I am typting as slowly as I can.
You. Cannot. Eliminate. People's. Rights. By. Plebiscite.
This. Is. Not. Like. An. Election.
On. Issues. Like. Equal. Protection. The Majority. Does. Not. Rule.

 

[alleyallen]

So let's see. The will of the people doesn't matter. OK.

So you want to give the GOP back all those congressional seats you picked up in 2006?

The will of the people lies with their ability to elect a representative government. But no one has the authority to override the Constitution, from which all our rights are born.

I'm incredibly thankful you don't serve in a position of authority. I'd weep if my life were in your hands.

The fact that you believe the will of the people should be able to abrogate our rights is horrifying.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

The "collective" will of the people, aa.
I think he's a Borg myself.

 

[alleyallen]

The "collective" will of the people, aa.
I think he's a Borg myself.

I shudder to think what laws we'd have in place and what rights we'd no longer have if the will of the people outweighed the Constitution.

It's highly unlikely we'd be able to post on a message board if that were the case.