Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

prop 8 passed

Wayne
Posts: 55
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 4:52:36 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
how long do you think until it is reversed?

8 years? 20 years? 40 years?
To be or not to be... what kind of question is that?
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 5:50:29 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Who knows, but someone will likely go and argue for gay marriage under equality of the UNITED STATES constitution. That will trump state constitution, which happens to be California.

I'd say when all the old conservatives die out is the perfect time to strike :D
antisemantic
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 8:10:23 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Who knows, but someone will likely go and argue for gay marriage under equality of the UNITED STATES constitution. That will trump state constitution, which happens to be California.

What happen to letting the peoplle decide. For once in my life I am proud of California. NO, we can not let the peopel decide, we need the goverment to decide for them. Just like we need the "cleaners" to decide for us which votes go where. Sad.
Good. Someday, and that day may never come, I'll call upon you to do a service for me. But, until that day, accept this justice as a gift on my daughter's wedding day.
antisemantic
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 8:10:57 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Oh yeah, someONE. Minority rule.
Good. Someday, and that day may never come, I'll call upon you to do a service for me. But, until that day, accept this justice as a gift on my daughter's wedding day.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 8:15:59 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 11/5/2008 8:10:57 PM, antisemantic wrote:
Oh yeah, someONE. Minority rule.

Not minority rule. It is merely protecting the minority from the oppression of the majority. This is a founding principle.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 8:45:18 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Rule of liberty, whether such is the majority party or not, that is what ought be sought :D.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Wayne
Posts: 55
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 8:54:08 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 11/5/2008 6:51:54 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The California gubernatorial elections will be held on November 2, 2010.

why would that matter?
To be or not to be... what kind of question is that?
Dnick94
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2008 9:09:29 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
X has the majority vote of 75%. Most of the voters are bias toward X. Therefore, X passed.
"Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them."
-Albert Einstein
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 9:26:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 5:17:35 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Probably less. I'd give it about 5 years.

Yep, and all it took was finding a judge who also lives the aberrant lifestyle who would be willing to disenfranchise 7 million voters, in order to protect that lifestyle.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 9:32:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/2/2013 9:26:57 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:17:35 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Probably less. I'd give it about 5 years.

Yep, and all it took was finding a judge who also lives the aberrant lifestyle who would be willing to disenfranchise 7 million voters, in order to protect that lifestyle.

They would be justified in 'disenfranchising' the whole country if it were necessary to uphold the Constitution. I fail to see how public opinion is at all relevant.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 4:11:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/2/2013 9:26:57 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:17:35 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Probably less. I'd give it about 5 years.

Yep, and all it took was finding a judge who also lives the aberrant lifestyle who would be willing to disenfranchise 7 million voters, in order to protect that lifestyle.

I normally don't like this argument, but this time it is correct.

Ahem:

The Constitution.

Case closed.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2013 11:31:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/2/2013 4:11:23 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/2/2013 9:26:57 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:17:35 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Probably less. I'd give it about 5 years.

Yep, and all it took was finding a judge who also lives the aberrant lifestyle who would be willing to disenfranchise 7 million voters, in order to protect that lifestyle.

I normally don't like this argument, but this time it is correct.

Ahem:

The Constitution raped and sodomized.

Case closed.
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2013 12:04:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/3/2013 11:31:07 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/2/2013 4:11:23 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/2/2013 9:26:57 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:17:35 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Probably less. I'd give it about 5 years.

Yep, and all it took was finding a judge who also lives the aberrant lifestyle who would be willing to disenfranchise 7 million voters, in order to protect that lifestyle.

I normally don't like this argument, but this time it is correct.

Ahem:

The Constitution raped and sodomized.

Case closed.

You literally know nothing of constitutional law, do you?
Tsar of DDO