|
0 members (),
4
guests, and
2
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,089
Posts313,786
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178 |
It appears that some are taking this fight to the federal court, now. Indeed, the spectrum of people upset by the ruling is surprising: Strange Bedfellows In Prop 8 Fight (CBS/AP) In choosing sides over the legality of gay marriage, two of the nation's top lawyers are saying, "I do."
Opposing attorneys in the 2000 election fight for Florida - David Boies, who represented Al Gore, and Ted Olson, George Bush's lawyer and later the U.S. Solicitor General - are teaming up to ask a federal court to throw out California's ban on same-sex marriage.
The two filed a lawsuit Friday on behalf of two gay men and two gay women, arguing that the marriage ban violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantees of equal protection and due process.
Olson said he hopes the case will wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court. I absolutely agree with the legal premise of the lawsuit. Nonetheless, I do not think that it is the appropriate approach at this time. Personally, I think the time is ripe, at least in California, for a ballot initiative to eliminate Prop 8. An electoral victory, particularly an initiative victory, will be the most influential result. The momentum is definitely going that way.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,853
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,853 |
I absolutely agree with the legal premise of the lawsuit. Nonetheless, I do not think that it is the appropriate approach at this time. Yes, I think it would be very foolish to expect the present US Supreme Court to protect civil rights. -
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178 |
At least the Court as currently constituted... and apparently others agree: Gay groups call federal marriage suit premature The American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and other national organizations issued a statement Wednesday saying they think the U.S. Supreme Court is not ready to issue a favorable ruling on the issue.
. . . .
Gay rights activists in California want to win marriage back for same-sex couples by going back to voters.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178 |
Here's a thought experiment. Consider the following statute: Section 1. All transportation providers carrying passengers in their coaches in this state, shall provide equal but separate accommodations for the heterosexual and homosexual passengers, by providing two or more passenger coaches for each passenger conveyance, or by dividing the passenger conveyance by a partition so as to secure separate accommodations. No person or persons shall be permitted to occupy seats in coaches, other than the ones assigned to them, on account of their sexual orientation.
Section 2. The officers of such transportation provider shall have power and are hereby required to assign each passenger to the coach or compartment used for the sexual orientation to which such passenger belongs; any passenger insisting on going into a coach or compartment to which by orientation he or she does not belong, shall be liable to a fine of five hundred dollars, or in lieu thereof to imprisonment for a period of not more than twenty days, and any officer of any transportation provider insisting on assigning a passenger to a coach or compartment other than the one set aside for the orientation to which said passenger belongs, shall be liable to a fine of five hunred dollars, or in lieu thereof to imprisonment for a period of not more than twenty days; and should any passenger refuse to occupy the coach or compartment to which he or she is assigned by the officer of such transportation provider, said officer shall have power to refuse to carry such passenger on his conveyance, and for such refusal neither he nor the company which he represents shall be liable for damages in any of the courts of this state. Anyone see any problems with this statute?
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,630 Likes: 28
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,630 Likes: 28 |
6 to 1 The Supreme Court of California rejected the challenge to Prop 8 which means the gay marriage in California is illegal.
The 18,000 gay marriages that were performed between June 2008 and November 2008 are valid.
The struggle in California for equality continues... I have not read through all the legalese following this post but this is my first chance to get here and voice my sadness and disappointment too. ... yet, I am terribly anxious for the result because it will say so much about where we are as a nation, and where we are going.  Hang in there, my friends. Don't ever give up.
"Life is not about waiting for the storms to pass...it's about learning how to dance in the rain."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28 |
NW Ponderer asks, "Anyone see any problems with this statute?" How about changing the statute to provide high class coaches for people with marriage licenses and separate and lesser coaches for people without marriage licenses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178 |
Oh, but Christian, that would be too overtly discriminatory... it is important to hide the prejudice and be "even-handed" about it.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,739
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,739 |
i bet the gay coaches would be more lively, better decorated and have higher quality entertainment! (or else something with lisa minelli - the horror, the horror)
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words."
(Philip K.Dick)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 605
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 605 |
NW Ponderer asks, "Anyone see any problems with this statute?" How about changing the statute to provide high class coaches for people with marriage licenses and separate and lesser coaches for people without marriage licenses. I would add that only those homosexual passengers married within a specific date range can obtain the high class coaches. The transportation provider will not be obligated to honor all marriage licenses in all states. Married homosexual couples will be carried in sections known as 'civil seating' which must provide most of the amenities included in the 'married seating' section, yet can not include the designation of 'married'.
We are constantly invited to be who we are. Henry David Thoreau
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,985 Likes: 178 |
What has appalled me about the whole Prop 8, and most particularly the awful, awful opinion of the California Supreme Court, is the blatant discrimination of it. On another thread I discussed the impact of Plessy v. Ferguson, which institutionalized bigotry for 60 years and gave the imprimatur of the Supreme Court of the United State to it. I had thought we had progressed so far as a people, and then to see this come back is frightening. The inherent illogic of the anti-gay forces is astounding to me, but what I find sad is how pervasive that lack of critical thinking is. I could pull a Glenn Beck and cry for the fear I have for my country.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
|
