Proposition 8 Dies with a Whimper.

[shrubnose]

My AP Government teacher used to say that the judicial branch of government has the most power of the three in federal government.

It also kind of gave itself that power, look up Marbury v. Madison if you want to know more about that.

The major limit on its power though is that it can not just strike down what ever, when ever. Cases have to be submitted about each law, and it can take a LONG time to make it to the Supreme Court.

Honestly anyone who is crying that the will of the people is not being followed clearly does not understand the basics of the U.S Federal Government. The constitutional republic not only exists to make sure the government is of the people, by the people, and for the people, but to ensure that majority vote does not overcome the rights of the minority. This is the way it has been since virtually the beginning, and if you want more verification on this feel free to go read the federalist papers, and many of the other documents from the time of founding.

One thing that the United States Supreme Court does not have is any kind of police or military power to use to enforce its rulings.

If enough people just ignore what the court says its wasting its breath when it says do/or don't do whatever.

 

[APACHERAT]

I don't mean to use personal attacks, but I like to call a spade a spade. The only somewhat "logical" reason I've ever been given by anti-SSM supporters is their religion. The bible doesn't say a single ****ing word about petitioning your government to harass sinners. If willing adults want to make a marriage contract with each other, that is simply none of your business. Injecting yourself like that into someone else's personal lives, while it doesn't effect you in any way, shape, or form, can really only come from a place of hate.

Sure, some of the methods in this case might not have been completely kosher, but at the end of the day, they were throwing out something that was unconstitutional and hateful, which is their job.

Calling a spade a spade is considered by many spades to be racist.

Have no idea how religion became part of this thread. The only reference to religion I have ever brought up on the DP have been Islam. Might have touched on Mormons during the elections because some stupid people politicized Mormons.

Those individuals who support Prop. 8 who made it a religious issue do have some good arguments. Gays and lesbians who oppose Prop. 8 also have a few good arguments. But both sides are fighting over a word. Pretty stupid in my opinion but the radical left do have a long track record of having problems with words.

But I do remember when Prop 8 was passed in California back in 2008, if you were black you sure sure didn't want to be caught on the streets of West Hollywood. I remember all of the venom from the LGBT community being directed towards blacks.

 

[APACHERAT]

One thing that the United States Supreme Court does not have is any kind of police or military power to use to enforce its rulings.

If enough people just ignore what the court says its wasting its breath when it says do/or don't do whatever.

Can't they use the U.S. Marshals Service. The U.S. Marshals are the law enforcement for the federal courts.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Calling a spade a spade is considered by many spades to be racist.

Have no idea how religion became part of this thread. The only reference to religion I have ever brought up on the DP have been Islam. Might have touched on Mormons during the elections because some stupid people politicized Mormons.

Those individuals who support Prop. 8 who made it a religious issue do have some good arguments. Gays and lesbians who oppose Prop. 8 also have a few good arguments. But both sides are fighting over a word. Pretty stupid in my opinion but the radical left do have a long track record of having problems with words.

But I do remember when Prop 8 was passed in California back in 2008, if you were black you sure sure didn't want to be caught on the streets of West Hollywood. I remember all of the venom from the LGBT community being directed towards blacks.

Uh huh.. All those crazy radical leftists expecting the same rights as you. What a bunch of radicals.

If it were just a word, you wouldn't be so upset that they can marry.

 

[APACHERAT]

I keep hearing this, but I'm pretty sure the constitution is silent on who can ride where on a bus, or what drinking fountain one must drink from.

it just says everyone is equal in the eyes of the law.

Prop 8 is so baldly discriminatory I can't believe anybody thought it would stand in the first place.

"Redheads may not play baseball in California."

"Only bald people may wear hats in California."

At the end of the day, the money to support anti-gay marriage legislation comes from religious groups and companies that were enjoying their spousal-benefit-free gay employees.

It seems like its ALWAYS about god or money these days.

That California law that didn't allow redheads to play baseball was repealed back in the late 1800's during the same time the law forbiding more than one horse being tied to a hitching post in front of a business.

What was interesting with repealing the redhead law, baseball players continued to wear hats.

 

[Master PO]

silly rapid tricks are for kids

your looking for honesty, logic and facts where there are none.

how ever you are right, the will of the people in a state vote cant violate the rights of others granted by constitutions.

really?......then how do you explain the left stance, that the rights of business owners can be taken away?

the left on this board say that business owners have no rights when it comes to affirmative action, minimum wage, smoking bans and discrimination laws

a business owner, has a right to association, right to property......the Constitution does not apply to citizens or business they only apply to governments, ..because it is governments who make laws..so constitutions limit governments.

explain how these laws can be created ...since none of them, have to do with any citizens having his rights infringed, and that they need to be created.

how can government tell a business who to hire, how much to pay a person, that smoking cannot be in a place of business, and an person, or business cannot discriminate....since no one....has a right to a job, certain pay, to be smoke free on another person's property, or discriminated against by a person of business per the constitution.

 

[AGENT J]

really?......then how do you explain the left stance, that the rights of business owners can be taken away?

the left on this board say that business owners have no rights when it comes to affirmative action, minimum wage, smoking bans and discrimination laws

a business owner, has a right to association, right to property......the Constitution does not apply to citizens or business they only apply to governments, ..because it is governments who make laws..so constitutions limit governments.

explain how these laws can be created ...since none of them, have to do with any citizens having his rights infringed, and that they need to be created.

how can government tell a business who to hire, how much to pay a person, that smoking cannot be in a place of business, and an person, or business cannot discriminate....since no one....has a right to a job, certain pay, to be smoke free on another person's property, or discriminated against by a person of business per the constitution.

yes we have all heard your OPINION on these matters, nobody ever buys it, but please keep up your good fight though. Maybe the next time you post it somebody will buy it

also in your opinion the stuff you speak of PLENTY of people on the right and in the middle dont want discrimination happening. SO trying to make your opinion just a left thing is just silly. But good luck!

 

[Master PO]

yes we have all heard your OPINION on these matters, nobody ever buys it, but please keep up your good fight though. Maybe the next time you post it somebody will buy it

also in your opinion the stuff you speak of PLENTY of people on the right and in the middle dont want discrimination happening. SO trying to make your opinion just a left thing is just silly. But good luck!

so your NOT GOING TO ANSWER, THE QUESTIONS AT ALL ARE YOU........AND WHY ?...becuase you would brand yourself wrong about what you have said in the past.

 

[Master PO]

question... prop 8 which is a referendum to stop gay marriage is not legal becuase rights of the people cannot be voted on..............and rights cannot be voted on , becuase we have republican government and unalienable rights.

then how can the public then vote on smoking referendums, which ban smoking on private property, and take away rights of the business owner, ...since no person has a right to be on anther's property.

how can government create laws, which restrict rights of the people, when there are no restrictions on the people in the constitution , for the government to act on?

 

[AGENT J]

so your NOT GOING TO ANSWER, THE QUESTIONS AT ALL ARE YOU........AND WHY ?...becuase you would brand yourself wrong about what you have said in the past.

me and plenty others have discussed your OPINION with you and i factually did just give you an answer
the stuff you say isnt factually going on its your OPINION so thats your answer, pretty easy to understand

nothing wrong with anything i said now or i said in the past, FAIL

you are free to think what you want, like i said good luck in your journey, I on the other hand support my government protecting the rights of its citizens and not allowing them to be discriminated against, if you support that oyu are free to do so. Write your congressmen and women, see if you can rally people that agree with you!

Good luck but my guess is you will fail because more people care about the rights of their fellow Americans to not be discriminated against than allowing it.

happy trails, i even got an idea for you, start here, maybe you could rally up support here start your own thread that actually deals with your fantasy topic, better yet start a public poll and see your results!

good luck again

 

[Master PO]

me and plenty others have discussed your OPINION with you and i factually did just give you an answer
the stuff you say isnt factually going on its your OPINION so thats your answer, pretty easy to understand

nothing wrong with anything i said now or i said in the past, FAIL

you are free to think what you want, like i said good luck in your journey, I on the other hand support my government protecting the rights of its citizens and not allowing them to be discriminated against, if you support that oyu are free to do so. Write your congressmen and women, see if you can rally people that agree with you!

Good luck but my guess is you will fail because more people care about the rights of their fellow Americans to not be discriminated against than allowing it.

happy trails, i even got an idea for you, start here, maybe you could rally up support here start your own thread that actually deals with your fantasy topic, better yet start a public poll and see your results!

good luck again

again you have no answer, and will refuse to answer, becuase its a dilemma for you

 

[AGENT J]

again you have no answer, and will refuse to answer, becuase its a dilemma for you

well nothing like resorting to lying, i factually answered you, but pleae post another lie, see if it will work next time
no dilemma here im very happy my government tries to stop discrimination

maybe somebody else will take your bait :shrug:

 

[Dittohead not!]

question... prop 8 which is a referendum to stop gay marriage is not legal becuase rights of the people cannot be voted on..............and rights cannot be voted on , becuase we have republican government and unalienable rights.

then how can the public then vote on smoking referendums, which ban smoking on private property, and take away rights of the business owner, ...since no person has a right to be on anther's property.

how can government create laws, which restrict rights of the people, when there are no restrictions on the people in the constitution , for the government to act on?

No one brought the smoking bans to the Supreme Court.

and if they did, they'd have to balance the rights of the business owners to allow smoking with the rights of customers not to have to smell it.

 

[Master PO]

well nothing like resorting to lying, i factually answered you, but pleae post another lie, see if it will work next time
no dilemma here im very happy my government tries to stop discrimination

maybe somebody else will take your bait :shrug:

again no answer from you.nothing, more defection on your part.


i will ask again.......you say people cannot vote on the rights of other people.

then explain why you believe the people and government can, vote to take away the rights of the people, who use their rights in a way you disapprove of?

 

[Master PO]

No one brought the smoking bans to the Supreme Court.

and if they did, they'd have to balance the rights of the business owners to allow smoking with the rights of customers not to have to smell it.

its not a matter of the court i am asking.


how can a referendum, be illegal when voting on rights of the people, and another referendum be legal when voting on rights of the people?


gay marriage ....illegal

smoking bans ..legal

 

[AGENT J]

1.)again no answer from you.nothing, more defcetion on your part.
2.)i will ask again.......you say people cannot vote on the rights of other people.
3.) then explain why you believe the people and government can, vote to take away the rights of the people, who use their rights in a way you disapprove of?

1.) again another lie from you, you know the posts saty here right they dont disappear right?
2.) nope i never once said that, you just posted ANOTHER lie, if you disagree please please LINK me saying that
3.) never said this either

feel free to make more stuff up though, you posts will just look more dishonest
Its funny how dishonest you always are and how far off topic you like to try and go. Is it that lonely here for you?

 

[Master PO]

1.) again another lie from you, you know the posts saty here right they dont disappear right?
2.) nope i never once said that, you just posted ANOTHER lie, if you disagree please please LINK me saying that
3.) never said this either

feel free to make more stuff up though, you posts will just look more dishonest
Its funny how dishonest you always are and how far off topic you like to try and go. Is it that lonely here for you?

you have already stated ..that a person cannot discriminate against another person...........

explain....... how a person cannot discriminate.... since the constitution places no restriction on a person or business.

you said the people cannot vote to take away the rights of other citizens............and thats correct!

then how can people and the government vote, to take away the right of association, and right to property?

 

[Dittohead not!]

its not a matter of the court i am asking.


how can a referendum, be illegal when voting on rights of the people, and another referendum be legal when voting on rights of the people?


gay marriage ....illegal

smoking bans ..legal

The SCOTUS can only rule on issues that have been brought before the court.

No one has brought smoking bans before the court.

Therefore, they have not ruled on smoking bans.

It's as simple as that.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)you have already stated ..that a person cannot discriminate against another person...........
2.)explain....... how a person cannot discriminate.... since the constitution places no restriction on a person or business.
3.) you said the people cannot vote to take away the rights of other citizens............and thats correct!
4.)then how can people and the government vote, to take away the right of association, and right to property?

1.) nope. you lied and made that up, it depends on the circumstances, when you are turned down for dates thats discrimination but they are allowed to do so
2.) see 1#
3.) nope never said this one time, posting this lie again wont make it true, like i said if you think i posted this simply like where i posted it but you dodged this request
4.) prop 8 doesnt do this

 

[Master PO]

The SCOTUS can only rule on issues that have been brought before the court.

No one has brought smoking bans before the court.

Therefore, they have not ruled on smoking bans.

It's as simple as that.

you are not understanding...i was asking a question of agent j.


how can a referendum be illegal when voting on the rights of the people.

then a referendum be legal when voting on the rights of the people.

America has republican government...not democratic government........rights cannot be voted on at all.

 

[TiredOfLife]

question... prop 8 which is a referendum to stop gay marriage is not legal becuase rights of the people cannot be voted on..............and rights cannot be voted on , becuase we have republican government and unalienable rights.

then how can the public then vote on smoking referendums, which ban smoking on private property, and take away rights of the business owner, ...since no person has a right to be on anther's property.

how can government create laws, which restrict rights of the people, when there are no restrictions on the people in the constitution , for the government to act on?

I will attempt to help here. The right to smoke is not a right, at least it's not a Civil Right like the right to vote, or to a fair trail, or to being equal before the law. The law does not say if you're gay you can't smoke but if you're straight you can, it says No Smoking, period, and everyone has equal standing. It can be voted on because it is not a fundamental issue while being Equal Before The Law is. You can vote on such things as human habits, smoking, drinking, taxes and the like, as long as everyone is equal before the law, and they are in such cases. You could not vote to say black people can't smoke but everyone else can. That's invalid even if you have a way to do so.

Gay marriage is about two adults getting a license from the state that the state issues to two adults, only based on tradition it has only given that to two opposite sex adults. That makes gay couples unequal before the law and without a compelling reason, and that is what got Porp 8 killed and why it should never have come up for a vote, it's not a thing you vote on. Once laws like that, Separate but Equal are found to violate Civil Rights, that's the end of the voting that shouldn't have happened in the first place. Oddly enough, sometime we vote to fix that but that is just as invalid, it simply makes it easier for the court to wait for society to catch up to what the law already knows, being unequal without a compelling reason is invalid.

 

[Master PO]

I will attempt to help here. The right to smoke is not a right, at least it's not a Civil Right like the right to vote, or to a fair trail, or to being equal before the law. The law does not say if you're gay you can't smoke but if you're straight you can, it says No Smoking, period, and everyone has equal standing. It can be voted on because it is not a fundamental issue while being Equal Before The Law is. You can vote on such things as human habits, smoking, drinking, taxes and the like, as long as everyone is equal before the law, and they are in such cases. You could not vote to say black people can't smoke but everyone else can. That's invalid even if you have a way to do so.

Gay marriage is about two adults getting a license from the state that the state issues to two adults, only based on tradition it has only given that to two opposite sex adults. That makes gay couples unequal before the law and without a compelling reason, and that is what got Porp 8 killed and why it should never have come up for a vote, it's not a thing you vote on. Once laws like that, Separate but Equal are found to violate Civil Rights, that's the end of the voting that shouldn't have happened in the first place. Oddly enough, sometime we vote to fix that but that is just as invalid, it simply makes it easier for the court to wait for society to catch up to what the law already knows, being unequal without a compelling reason is invalid.

i see iam going to have to break this down further.



if the people cannot have a referendum, to vote on the rights of other people becuase it is illegal.................and it is under republican government.

then how can a referendum of the people be legal to denied someone their right to association and right to property, when it comes to their own business?............meaning the owner in not doing anything which would infringe on another persons rights or could infringe.

no citizen has a right to enter another person's property or be served.........therefore the people or government cannot vote to stop smoking on a business owners own property.

the bill of rights........are not a granting of rights..........they are a restriction on the federal government not to create laws which would infringe on the rights of people.

 

[TiredOfLife]

i see iam going to have to break this down further.



if the people cannot have a referendum, to vote on the rights of other people becuase it is illegal.................and it is under republican government.

then how can a referendum of the people be legal to denied someone their right to association and right to property, when it comes to their own business?............meaning the owner in not doing anything which would infringe on another persons rights or could infringe.

no citizen has a right to enter another person's property or be served.........therefore the people or government cannot vote to stop smoking on a business owners own property.

the bill of rights........are not a granting of rights..........they are a restriction on the federal government not to create laws which would infringe on the rights of people.

Tell me, if I wish to run a child brothel at my hotel, and the parents of the kids are willing to let their children work for me, can I do so? What if I own a nice big house in a great expensive neighborhood and I wish to dig a giant hole there and start a toxic waste dump, fully contained of course. Can I do that?

 

[Master PO]

Tell me, if I wish to run a child brothel at my hotel, and the parents of the kids are willing to let their children work for me, can I do so? What if I own a nice big house in a great expensive neighborhood and I wish to dig a giant hole there and start a toxic waste dump, fully contained of course. Can I do that?

no becuase that is a infringement of the right of a child, the other would be a infringement of the rights of other property owners near by........and those are terrible examples.


can i as a business owner, allow smoking in my business .....yes.....can i discriminate against people i wish to ...yes..........why?


becuase the property is my property, i force no one through the door to make them breath the smoke, a person has free will to enter or not enter.

i can discriminate, becuase i have the right to association because its my business, i dont have to engage in commerce with you ..i can refuse........you have the option of going to another business.

the constitution places no restrictions on people or business, unless they infringe on the rights of people, or could infringe............again rights of people, by using ......u.s.code

you dont have a right to be served by me, or a right to enter my property.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

question... prop 8 which is a referendum to stop gay marriage is not legal becuase rights of the people cannot be voted on..............and rights cannot be voted on , becuase we have republican government and unalienable rights.

then how can the public then vote on smoking referendums, which ban smoking on private property, and take away rights of the business owner, ...since no person has a right to be on anther's property.

how can government create laws, which restrict rights of the people, when there are no restrictions on the people in the constitution , for the government to act on?

I get the point you're trying to make, but the single biggest difference between marriage and everything else on your list is that nobody else's rights are impacted when two (or more) people get married, whereas all of those other issues involve the rights of various parties coming into conflict with one another.