Prop 8 ruled unconstitutional

[Sun Aut Ex]

Then why are you complaining?

Because trying to make sense of your screwy legal system hurts.

And you wonder why there's so many constitutional nuts out there.

[Wamitoria]

*Vomits*

*pushes in mud*

[Vervaria]

*Vomits*

Please use the designated wastebasket for fake troll vomit. Thank you.

[Chazicaria]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

[Sarzonia]

I think the critical blow for our side was when Theodore B. Olson took on the case.

If you read his Newsweek article, "The Conservative Case For Gay Marriage," he makes some compelling arguments there. Actually, I've used many of his arguments in the past when I've fought for this issue. Hearing the same arguments from Olson gives them some serious gravitas.

Justice has prevailed. Hallelujah!

[Gahaldu]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

There was a time when most people would vote in favor of mass murdering (or enslaving) blacks.

[Seculartopia]

Then why are you complaining?

Because trying to make sense of your screwy legal system hurts.

And you wonder why there's so many constitutional nuts out there.

The legal system is meant to be firm but flexible. As are alot of other legal systems.

[Tekania]

No, they have a blank check for protecting rights that have not necessarily been enumerated previously, which is in fact their job, and something which was BY DESIGN.

Well, see, that system is based on the assumption of natural rights.

Our very foundation of law is based upon the assumption of natural rights. Truthfully it's the only system which makes sense; anything else is merely despotism in new clothes.

[Gahaldu]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

It was designed with equality in mind.

[Wamitoria]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

Where in the constitution does it say "no marriage for homos"?

[Chazicaria]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

It was designed with equality in mind.

Equality for normal people.

[Jusela]

At this rate, they'd legalising polygamy soon.

Why not? Why should someone be punished for being polyamourous?

What about pedophilia then? Why not legalise that too? Why should someone be punished for sleeping with children?

You are the one suggesting it, not us, pedo.

Heck, if we legalise gay marriage, why just not go ahead and legalise polygamy, animal marriage, pedophilia (insert your choice of sexual perversion here) then? Equal rights for everyone, let us not discriminate against anyone! Surely that is what most liberal leftists want.

[Vervaria]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

It was designed with equality in mind.

Equality for normal people.

White landowners you mean.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

You should read my posts about the Ninth Amendment. If you don't like the Supreme Court's interpretation of it, petition your government for a Constitutional Amendment.

[Gahaldu]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

It was designed with equality in mind.

Equality for normal people.

Once upon a time interracial marriage was considered abnormal.

[Sun Aut Ex]

Our very foundation of law is based upon the assumption of natural rights. Truthfully it's the only system which makes sense; anything else is merely despotism in new clothes.

I don't believe in natural rights. Nature doesn't hand out rights. Man makes his own rights, and must be prepared to defend them against idiots from over the seas who want to quash them.

[Tokos]

It was designed with equality in mind.

Tricky word, equality. You can mean almost anything by it. You can change your "equal" status legally in America, by being born a drooling retard or being a prisoner, yes?

[Buffett and Colbert]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

It was designed with equality in mind.

Equality for normal people.

White male landowners you mean.

Fixed.

[Vervaria]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

It was designed with equality in mind.

Equality for normal people.

White male landowners you mean.

Fixed.

Ah, forgot about that, thank you.

[Buffett and Colbert]

It was designed with equality in mind.

Tricky word, equality. You can mean almost anything by it. You can change your "equal" status legally in America, by being born a drooling retard or being a prisoner, yes?

You're very hard to follow.

[Wamitoria]

At this rate, they'd legalising polygamy soon.

Why not? Why should someone be punished for being polyamourous?

What about pedophilia then? Why not legalise that too? Why should someone be punished for sleeping with children?

You are the one suggesting it, not us, pedo.

Heck, if we legalise gay marriage, why just not go ahead and legalise polygamy, animal marriage, pedophilia (insert your choice of sexual perversion here) then? Equal rights for everyone, let us not discriminate against anyone! Surely that is what most liberal leftists want.

For the last time... Homosexuality =/= Polygamy, animal marriage, pedophilia, etc.

Your argument is invalid.

[Knowlandia]

NSG is liberal, how do you think they'll take the rulling? I'm not a liberal, I'm not a conservative either, both sides are political fundimentalists and have some retarded views.

Anyway, back on topic, I am happy about the rulling. I don't see why any 2 adults can't sign a legal contract that mandates that they share certain property/items and that they have certain rights to answer for each other.

[Gahaldu]

It was designed with equality in mind.

Tricky word, equality. You can mean almost anything by it. You can change your "equal" status legally in America, by being born a drooling retard or being a prisoner, yes?

True, but being gay is not a mental impairment or a crime.

[Chazicaria]

Maybe that idiot judge will come to his senses and do the right thing by keeping prop-8 as law. The people voted, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, people cant vote away the Constitution.

The constitution wasn't designed with homos in mind. Back then they were secluded from society or frowned upon, and rightfully so. Now if the Constitution said "Let all be married" then I could understand the judges reasoning, but I would still heavily oppose gay marriage. I'm just waiting for an amendment that says "no marriage for homos".

It was designed with equality in mind.

Equality for normal people.

Once upon a time interracial marriage was considered abnormal.

As long as it is a MAN and WOMAN. And to the white landowners thing, that is completely irrelevant, racism isn't the same as normality.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Our very foundation of law is based upon the assumption of natural rights. Truthfully it's the only system which makes sense; anything else is merely despotism in new clothes.

I don't believe in natural rights. Nature doesn't hand out rights. Man makes his own rights, and must be prepared to defend them against idiots from over the seas who want to quash them.

That's all well and good, but you do not equal the Constitution.