Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Kandahar said:Plessy v Ferguson is alive and well, even in a libertarian-leaning state like Oregon.
Disgusting.
Navy Pride said:I don't know about libertarian but it is a very liberal state but they were smart enough to pass a consitutional amendment stating that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman......
hipsterdufus said:Discrimination is alive and well in the US.
Kelzie said:You know, they wouldn't put women's voting rights up to a vote because it wouldn't pass. Just goes to show how dumb people are.
hipsterdufus said:I would add slavery to the list too.
cnredd said:Just make sure that any dissent should be directed at THE LAW and not THE JUDGE....
The state judges are sworn to UPHOLD their state's Constitution...If he judged otherwise, he would become the dreaded "activist judge"....
The "amendment" that was before him SHOULD go to the state's legislature, NOT the judiciary...
If the amendment was passed, the judge would equally have to uphold it...
My fault...:3oops:aps said:So what does being an activist judge mean? If the judge determines the law is unconstitutional? Hmmmm
The New York Times, back in July 2005, provided the % of times each justice voted to strike down a law passed by Congress. Here is the list of justices and the % of their votes:
Thomas:.......65.63%
Kennedy:.......64.06%
Scalia:..........56.25%
Rehnquist:...46.88%
O'Connor:.....46.77%
Souter:.........42.19%
Stevens:.......39.34%
Ginsburg:......39.06%
Breyer:..........28.13%
So which side seems to legislate more from the bench? Bwahahahahhahahah
cnredd said:My fault...:3oops:
I should have mentioned the difference between the state's SUPREME COURT who's job it is to do that, and not the judges from the lower courts...
In this instance, it states that he was a Marion County Circuit Judge...
As a matter of fact, womens voting rights did go up for a vote and the constitutional amendment passed -- just like the anti-slavery amendment.Kelzie said:You know, they wouldn't put women's voting rights up to a vote because it wouldn't pass. Just goes to show how dumb people are.
No, it's when a judge usurps the legislative function and creates new law from the bench (like Roe v. Wade).aps said:So what does being an activist judge mean? If the judge determines the law is unconstitutional? Hmmmm
Diogenes said:As a matter of fact, womens voting rights did go up for a vote and the constitutional amendment passed -- just like the anti-slavery amendment.
No, it's when a judge usurps the legislative function and creates new law from the bench (like Roe v. Wade).
Kelzie said:Not to the public it didn't. Which were the ones who voted in this asinine law.
Navy Pride said:I believe the amendment passed by close to a 60% majority in one of the most liberal states in the union.....
If there is any message to be learned out of this it is the voters in Oregon do not want to change the definition of marriage.......
Kelzie said:Same thing with women's voting right. Sometimes people are too ignorant to decide important issues.
Navy Pride said:Why is that, because they don't agree with your left wing viewpoint?
Sorry we do these things at the ballot box........
Diogenes said:As a matter of fact, womens voting rights did go up for a vote and the constitutional amendment passed -- just like the anti-slavery amendment.
Kelzie said:You're missing the point. They didn't put women's rights to vote to the ballot box because it wouldn't have passed. Same thing here, except someone was dumb enough to have the people vote on it.
And we don't vote on a lot of important issues. Did you vote on Roe v Wade?
Navy Pride said:Why is that, because they don't agree with your left wing viewpoint?
Sorry we do these things at the ballot box........
Navy Pride said:If they did not put a woman's right to vote on the ballot, how do you know it would not have passed?
I wish they would have a nation wide referendum on Roe V Wade..........The results might be interesting and don't tell me about polls because you know how I feel about them.....
Navy Pride said:http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1282101
SALEM, Ore. Nov 4, 2005 — A judge on Friday upheld a gay marriage ban adopted by Oregon voters last year, rejecting claims that the amendment made too many changes at once and interfered with local government.
In his ruling, Marion County Circuit Judge Joseph Guimond backed supporters of the law who said the measure only clarified marriage law in a single, simple sentence.
The Oregon amendment, passed overwhelmingly in November 2004 as Measure 36, reads: "It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage."
aps said:What gay discrimination is now is what racial discrimination was when Brown v. Board of Education was decided.
Eventually, gay people will be able to marry. I truly believe that.
Yes it did, beginning in Wyoming when the territory became a state. If you ever get out to South Pass City, a restored ghost town about 30 miles south of Lander, stop in and learn something about the early history of the movement. The movement gained momentum, particularly in frontier states where it was difficult to ignore the obvious contribution of women, and spread among the states until it achieved the necessary super-majority to become a national constitutional amendment almost half a century later.Kelzie said:Not to the public it didn't. Which were the ones who voted in this asinine law.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?