60
   

California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

 
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Sep, 2010 12:14 am
@wmwcjr,
wmwcjr wrote:

"This video is no longer available"


WOW maybe because the female dressed in uniform... weird
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 15 Sep, 2010 07:01 am
@RexRed,
One simply cannot go from a "maybe" to a definite conclusion Rex.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Sep, 2010 11:54 pm
rex is
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2010 07:09 am
Current TV on Uganda Homosexual Legislation: Click

45 minutes long.

Worth watching. Interesting portrait of why specifically allowing religion into politics is very dangerous. There is a bit a of a overlap with Prop8 in the story as well.

A
R
T
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Sep, 2010 01:28 am
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

Current TV on Uganda Homosexual Legislation: Click

45 minutes long.

Worth watching. Interesting portrait of why specifically allowing religion into politics is very dangerous. There is a bit a of a overlap with Prop8 in the story as well.

A
R
T


THIS is religious hate sucking ass...
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 05:10 pm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39269119/ns/politics/
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 05:24 pm
@RexRed,
Rex I do know that you do not owe anyone any thing but we sure could use other brilliant minds such as yours on other human right isues. There is a unlimited supply of them! Ethics is a nice place to start. here is one thread among thousands that we could use your help. Thank you for any input Your friend Reasoning Self Logic. http://able2know.org/topic/138789-1
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 09:16 am
LOL

A
R
T
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 10:11 am
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

LOL

A
R
T


We have been reduced to operators of heavy machinery. Smile
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 12:00 pm
This is interesting..

The Democratic administration's court brief opposing a lifting of DADT, in response to a lawsuit brought by the Log Cabin Republicans.
I thought this administration was in favor of eliminating DADT, but here in their response to the Log Cabin Republicans they oppose lifting DADT.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM156_govt_objection_to_injunction.html

OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 02:26 pm
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

LOL

A
R
T
Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 11:48 pm
Quote:
Conservatives and liberals believe that insulation from voters has allowed judges to rule independently of popular opinion. That belief is why national organizations have poured money into the ouster campaign in Iowa and why the effort is causing worry among advocates for same-sex marriage and for an independent judiciary. Same-sex marriage has been initially approved in four states by supreme courts and in three (and the District of Columbia) by legislatures.

Troy Price, political director for One Iowa, a gay rights group, said Iowans would not have voted for same-sex marriage and would likely reject it today. “Our concern is the message it sends to judges around the country that if you have a case like ours come before you, you could very well lose your jobs over it,” Mr. Price said. “This is an effort to intimidate the courts in Iowa and intimidate courts all across the country.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/25/us/politics/25judges.html?hp

Damn right, if Judges insist upon legislating from the bench we the people can insist that they leave the bench. The system works, the PEOPLE decide what we do as a nation, not Judges.
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 11:55 pm
@mysteryman,
MM - I'm typically concerned that elected democrats don't puss-out. That's what I read in those tea leaves: The placement of some sort of plan if DADT isn't repealed.

Such is the difference between politics and policy. It's a waltz, and who is leading is very important.

A
R
T
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 02:51 am
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

MM - I'm typically concerned that elected democrats don't puss-out. That's what I read in those tea leaves: The placement of some sort of plan if DADT isn't repealed.

Such is the difference between politics and policy. It's a waltz, and who is leading is very important.

A
R
T


With an election coming the parties are trying to muddy the perceptions of what they really stand for in order to broaden their voting pool.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 07:46 pm
I have been crying lately. The republicans keep calling me and it takes me back to the election when I almost was permitted to marry the love of my life. I won't answer the phone because I don't want to get angry. I remember those nasty conservatives shouting on the street corners with signs condemning homosexuals and it makes me disgusted. Yes I have feelings and my heart is breaking and they don't get it that i simply do not want to talk to them. Not to hear them slant the truth when it was them who stood against gays and marriage equality here in Maine. I did not get any doomsday emails from the democrats telling me that every vote was needed to defeat gays and lesbians in Maine. But every day the republicans were sending me emails on their campaign against gays here in Maine.

I can't bring myself to even open a dialogue with them. They have ruined my life when I needed the law behind me they took it away. Yes I am not ashamed to show my feelings. I do not trust the republicans and what is there to forgive, they are still against gay marriage and they cannot fool me. I am sure not every republican member is against gay marriage nor is every catholic but they are today the number one manufacturers of hate against gays as a whole. It saddens me not only for how losing gay marriage ruined my life and has left me without my soul mate for over a year but for all of the other gays and lesbians struggling thorough this time of being the brunt of this conservative hate for whatever the reason.

So gloat but don't expect me to pick up the phone and ever again give you the time of day. Life is too precious to waste on such as you.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 02:22 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Damn right, if Judges insist upon legislating from the bench we the people can insist that they leave the bench. The system works, the PEOPLE decide what we do as a nation, not Judges.


Quote:
DES MOINES — In a rebuke of the state supreme court with implications for judicial elections across the country, voters here removed three justices who participated in a ruling last year that made the state the first in the Midwest to permit same-sex marriage.

The close vote concluded an unusually aggressive ouster campaign in the typically sleepy state judicial retention elections that pitted concerns about judicial overreaching against concerns about judicial independence. Years of grumbling about “robed masters,” conservatives demonstrated their ability to target and remove judges who issue opinions they disagree with.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/politics/03judges.html?_r=1

It is about damn time for the majority to assert its rights....the minority should not be able to win every time simply by playing the victim card. If Judges can't bring themselves to respect the will of the majority they should be removed from office.
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 06:32 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Damn right, if Judges insist upon legislating from the bench we the people can insist that they leave the bench. The system works, the PEOPLE decide what we do as a nation, not Judges.


Quote:
DES MOINES — In a rebuke of the state supreme court with implications for judicial elections across the country, voters here removed three justices who participated in a ruling last year that made the state the first in the Midwest to permit same-sex marriage.

The close vote concluded an unusually aggressive ouster campaign in the typically sleepy state judicial retention elections that pitted concerns about judicial overreaching against concerns about judicial independence. Years of grumbling about “robed masters,” conservatives demonstrated their ability to target and remove judges who issue opinions they disagree with.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/politics/03judges.html?_r=1

It is about damn time for the majority to assert its rights....the minority should not be able to win every time simply by playing the victim card. If Judges can't bring themselves to respect the will of the majority they should be removed from office.


The majority, sadly, can be dead wrong too...

(Crucify him, Crucify him!)

While judges (Pontius Pilate) washed their hands of the whole affair.

You would think you might have learned something of equality and justice from this same book you would, seemingly, have forced upon people by, err, "the tea party".

Do they plan to take our country back by dumping tea in the harbor (terrorists acts) Standing on the lawn of capital hill or the Lincoln memorial with Glen Beck and preaching religion to a secular government?

Or maybe the conservatives will just call people the n and f words after a health care vote has been cast by the publicly elected body of senators and representatives?

The conservatives cannot be trusted to govern "the people" when they are bought and paid for by big business money. (den of thieves)
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 03:14 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Damn right, if Judges insist upon legislating from the bench we the people can insist that they leave the bench. The system works, the PEOPLE decide what we do as a nation, not Judges.


Quote:
DES MOINES — In a rebuke of the state supreme court with implications for judicial elections across the country, voters here removed three justices who participated in a ruling last year that made the state the first in the Midwest to permit same-sex marriage.

The close vote concluded an unusually aggressive ouster campaign in the typically sleepy state judicial retention elections that pitted concerns about judicial overreaching against concerns about judicial independence. Years of grumbling about “robed masters,” conservatives demonstrated their ability to target and remove judges who issue opinions they disagree with.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/politics/03judges.html?_r=1

It is about damn time for the majority to assert its rights....the minority should not be able to win every time simply by playing the victim card. If Judges can't bring themselves to respect the will of the majority they should be removed from office.


Wow It seems that I heard a muslim speak this exact same line! [ Not all muslims]

Your Quote: { If Judges can't bring themselves to respect the will of the majority they should be removed from office.}

Do you also believe in sharia law? or is it that you share the same ideology as them, "If they do not see things how I see them they are wrong?

Forget love thy neighbor as yourself," hate thy enemy and thy neighbor unless they share my ideology? This is all I have amen?
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 04:05 pm
@reasoning logic,
Hang on rl. hawk has committed himself to going with the voters. If anybody wins the vote he will defend them.

Sharia law is in the hands of Islamic judges. Just the sort hawk is objecting to. If you are for giving judges precedence over a democratic vote you are the one who is looking for Sharia law.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 05:25 pm
@spendius,
Are you saying that the majority of people do not believe in the sharia law? Now you do know that we can not include the woman in this subject correct?
 

Related Topics

New York New York! - Discussion by jcboy
Prop 8? - Discussion by majikal
Gay Marriage - Discussion by blatham
Gay Marriage -- An Old Post Revisited - Discussion by pavarasra
Who doesn't back gay marriage? - Question by The Pentacle Queen
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 11/26/2024 at 05:31:36