Gunner Forum banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,450 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
MSNBC staff and news service reports
updated 16 minutes ago
SAN FRANCISCO - In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation's biggest state to tie the knot.

Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in an opinion written by Chief Justice Ron George.

Outside the courthouse, gay marriage supporters cried and cheered as news spread of the decision.



Here we go and its only just begun. The rest of the states will begin to follow now. When is California supposed to drop off into the ocean? I'd be happy if their courts just disappeared forever. The people of California did not vote to accept this - the Supreme Court decided all by itself. Now same sex couples will get busier adopting and taking advantage of artificial insemination so that this nation will have to deal with their confused children. I wonder how long it will take before religion as we know it is taken over by Oprah's new warm and fuzzy version so that everything is right if it feels good and it's what YOU want. Grrrr
 

·
Site Founder
Joined
·
25,453 Posts
I'm ok with the whole gay marriage thing. I say live and let live. If someone's not hurting me or mine they can do what they want. To an extent of course. :|
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
I'm not okay with this. What's next ? Breeding between humans and non humans allowed by the so called courts? Our children are being bombed at school by this very attitude. If they come home to the same agenda....we might as well toss morals out the window.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
What I have a problem with is that the Court is overruling what the people voted for. What is the point of voting if the courts are going to do what they want anyway. The judge/judges should be tried for treason....yes, treason....going against what the people have said they want.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,011 Posts
I'm with Bounty Hunter on this one. I have better things to do than worry about Gay marriage! It doesn't affect me one way or the other. I don't believe that gay people can make children turn gay. If someone can be turned gay then they already leaned that way to beguin with. As far as gay marriage cheapening the "Holy Rite of Marriage", then what does a 75% (just a guess not sure of actual % but I think I'm close) divorce rate say. Truth is the marriage vows mean nothing anymore. Not to mention its just more Smoke & Mirrors to avert your attention away from the fact that the Corporate Nazi Regeme is trying to take away your rights!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:

Arent there enough issues more worthy our time than that???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,063 Posts
I'm with BH on this one as well. If it’s not hurting anyone, do what makes you happy. Life’s too short to worry if one guy marries another.

As far as the courts not ruling what the people voted, remember that the people in Arkansas wanted nothing to do with integrating the schools yet SCOTUS ruled that they had to in Brown v. Board of Education. There were a lot of people mad that the government forced the issue when they called in the National Guard. These types of things have a way of becoming the "right" thing to do in hind sight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
John, you make a good point...but, when the courts can go against what the people vote, then what good is the vote? I also agree with BH. It doen't affect me, so I don't care what one's preference is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
I'm not worried about it either untill it becomes mandatory for the sake of social acceptance......look around the idiots if you want to ,but keep in mind the fact will be aimed at our children.
 

·
Site Founder
Joined
·
25,453 Posts
Wizard you make a good point but... On the one hand the courts doing as they please rather than what people have voted can be wrong. But there's always the other hand. Sometimes they have to step in to uphold, laws, The Constitution, The Amendments, etc. They're doing it now with the 2A. There are 2 sides to every coin I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,063 Posts
This is one of the very misunderstood jobs of the judicial branch of government. Let's go back to basics and I’ll try to explain it as best I know how.

The three branches:

The Legislative branch is charged with making laws. Easy enough.

The Executive branch is charged with enforcing the laws. Be it through the National Guard in the case of Brown v. Board or by appointment of those charged with enforcement, as in the Attorney General.

The Judicial branch is charged with the interpretation of the law. This is where things get tricky. They are supposed to interpret the law based upon the constitution. In the case of SCOTUS the US constitution, but in the case of the state courts, they would base their interpretation on the individual states own constitution. The Supreme Court (be it state or national) can say that a law is acceptable based upon the constitution, or it can strike it down.

An amendment to the constitution is different, and courts are SUPPOSED to uphold these statements. All constitutions allow for changes, and adding an amendment to limit marriage to one man and one woman has happened in this country, and those amendments are not being challenged with any success YET.

Here is the majority opinion written by the California Chief Justice:

"We therefore conclude that in view of the substance and significance of the fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship, the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples," Chief Justice Ronald George wrote for the majority.

Notice that in California the court struck down a law, and not an amendment.
 

·
Site Founder
Joined
·
25,453 Posts
I'm not blaming anyone. Even now that you've explained to me what the courts are supposed to do. :lol:

I'm much more familiar with the working of the little local court. I can tell you a thing or 3 about that. :?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
its california........................

as far as the folks in california are concerned, if they feel that strongly about the subject then they should seek an amendment to their State Constitution.......

I am a big believer in States Rights as that is where the power should be---not thousands of miles away in d.c. where politicans who have no representation in your State can make a policy for your State for the sake of the political winds which just ain't right...........

the real question here however will be this..........will a same sex marriage by California law still be considered a legal marriage should the "family" move to a different State that does not reconize the "union" of the two individuals.........in other words, will Texas or any other State be forced to reconize and abide by the laws of California?

This is where the feds may get involved----and they should not-----it should be left up to the States.........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
John, you are totally missing my point. All I am saying is that if the majority votes to make something a law, then no judge should have the right to strike down that law. If the court does have that right (and they do), then the system is broken and needs fixing....that says that the judicial branch, in this country has TOO MUCH FREAKIN' POWER......that is the point I am making.....our system was set up wrong.
 

·
Site Founder
Joined
·
25,453 Posts
deputy125 said:
its california........................
the real question here however will be this..........will a same sex marriage by California law still be considered a legal marriage should the "family" move to a different State that does not reconize the "union" of the two individuals.........in other words, will Texas or any other State be forced to reconize and abide by the laws of California?
Good point. Some states do not recognize it and the "couple" will lose all benefits that go along with marriage. It's legal here in NH and I'm fine with that. I think if the state recognizes the union then they should get the same benefits allowed man/woman marriages. I just don't think they should be allowed "extra" rights, or benefits, that some seem to think they should have. I believe that in time this will be the bigger issue. I don't believe in the whole "Gay rights" deal. I think everyone is equal and therefore should have the same rights. Not special ones just because they choose to live a certain way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
977 Posts
I'm not worried about the gays at all, i know where my pencil is sharpened. But what i do have a problem with is, a government that is ruled by the people for the people can do whatever the hell they see fit???? I'm not thinking this is what our forfathers had in mind by that phrase. This case just proves the point that the majority vote doesn't mean squat anymore.

where's the democracy in this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,450 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
John, good description of our judicial system. Thanks.

To some extent I can understand the 'other' viewpoint but I disagree that in the end, this will not have an effect on the rest of society. You who disagree with me are looking at the surface with a logical mind and only in view of yourselves. You who think this is fine are not parents/grandparents. You will not have to 'explain' this crap to anyone that would have trouble grasping the concept and then keeping them on the right road.

Morals have kept this country what it is. Morals also keep people sane and life remains orderly. Take them away and you lose - watch and see. The homosexual act is a dead-end street. Nothing comes of it. It is unnatural. There are plenty of other unnatural acts that you guys would hiss at - pedifiles of all kinds, torture that brings gratification, rape, indecent exposure, humans and animals, incest etc. Yet, many people who have not 'chosen' to have these traits and desires innocently possess them. Do they too deserve equal rights to do what makes them happy because it wouldn't affect your personal lives? The fabric that holds this great nation together is shredding and we're helping it along by allowing these types of things.

I've known quite a few homosexuals that are wonderful as people. Their personal lifestyle however flits from one person to another. Even when 'living with' someone they cheat. From what I've seen, the relationships last for awhile and then disintegrate. It is NOT love, it is SEX. There is a difference. It is not loving the beloved more than loving self but rather the opposite. I'm talking majority here as there always are exceptions. Many hold those hideous gay parades mocking heterosexuals in ridiculous and obscene ways while enjoying themselves to the hilt.

Deadeye, you have been soured on marriage but there are GOOD marriages and plenty of them. As morals die so does everything else including the poor attitude of many women since they've swallowed what they've been told - that they can have it all and do it all. The people who have taken upon themselves to change the women and their 'awful lives' here in the US also belittle our men until they are only useful at night if we 'choose'. That has angered me from the git-go. Females are becoming self-centered and bossy and the gentleman is disappearing. No one is left at home to properly raise the children - true affection toward ones mate is being replaced with SELF.

All of us need to take a firm stand on many issues and not shove things aside because we can't see how it will touch our personal lives in the future.

You guys would have a fit if the courts overruled your right to own guns. Yet, many many others would not see a problem with that because they didn't seriously 'think' it over and swallowed the one-sided crap they were fed. Also, it would not 'personally' affect them because they don't want to own a gun.

I too have a difficult time understanding how the courts can overrule the people. I understand what John explained but I still feel they overstepped their boundaries here. There is right/white and there is wrong/black. They are supporting a very dark GREY.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
11,120 Posts
Marriage is a legal institution that gives certain rights to the parties and gives legal status to spouses. I have a problem with the state sanctioning their relationship and hence forcing me to accept their legal status. If two gay people wish to have a relationship that is their business and not mine. I have a problem with having the state sanctioning it.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top