Gay marriage...law of the land.

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 61 - 80 of total 494 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Ksolem

Trad climber
Monrovia, California
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:00am PT
The unfettered power of the Supreme Court is a flaw in the founders plan. A panel of judges in black robes, as if that makes them above the rest of us, make law with no public recourse. I am not a fan.

At least they got this one right, albeit by a narrow margin.

Good grief, am I in agreement with Fry? I think my head is gonna explode at that thought :-)

Srbphoto

climber
Kennewick wa
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:00am PT
I wonder how many will actually read the decision. You may find out why it was 5-4. Sometimes you're surprised why those who voted for an issue did.


I do love the bemoaning of "activist judges". I guess it only matters when your ox is getting gored.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:02am PT
God already has punishments laid out for gay marriage.

Men will have to deal with being married to someone who doesn't listen to them, and is dirty, smelly, and hairy.

And women will have to deal with being married to someone who nags, treats them like a child, and tries to change them.

Good one, the Fet! God has sufficient power to give all of us the punishment we deserve. I thank Him that He shows grace and not mere justice. I fail to understand why people of faith get so worked up when the law doesn't enforce our singular morality.

John
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:04am PT
states like CA and CO are in direct violation of Federal law.
Partially correct. Much to the consternation of the Santa Cruz County Sheriff.
Don't try to one up me on the Constitution.

Except you're not entirely correct. In Californication:
Medical marijuana is legal pursuant to Proposition 215 in 1996 and Senate Bill 420. Recreational marijuana possession of up to one ounce is an infraction, similar to a traffic violation, with a $100 fine.
IF the Feds want to bring charges in Nevada, Washington, California or Oregon or Colorado or.........they can. They have the jurisdiction.
Several years ago, Obama said he wasn't going to interfere with the states on this one.
Late last year Congress effectively ended enforcement actions against recreational growing and possession:
The spending bill includes an amendment that prohibits the Department of Justice from using funds to go after state-legal medical cannabis programs. If the bill is signed into law, it will bring the federal government one step closer to ending raids on medical marijuana dispensaries, as well as stopping arrests of individuals involved with pot businesses that are complying with state law.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/14/congress-medical-marijuana_n_6317866.html
I haven't seen a CAMP helicopter mapping the San Lorenzo Valley in at least 5 years. They used to map the whole area about 3X per year. Rapidly growing vegetation was what they were looking for.
I can point to 3 significant grow operations from my deck and I know of about 10 others.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:14am PT
Here's part of the Village Idiot's dissent:
The corollary of that principle is that human dignity cannot be taken away by the government. Slaves did not lose their dignity (any more than they lost their humanity) because the government allowed them to be enslaved. Those held in internment camps did not lose their dignity because the government confined them. And those denied governmental benefits certainly do not lose their dignity because the government denies them those benefits. The government cannot bestow dignity, and it cannot take it away
Justice Clarence Thomas with no hit of sarcasm or irony.
What universe does he live in where slavery doesn't take away dignity?
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:18am PT
Do we need a second thread?

Oh wait, isn't having two of the same threads together what this is about?
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:29am PT
Meanwhile from the brilliant Scott Walker:

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) condemned the Supreme Court for legalizing gay marriage on Friday, calling their ruling for Obergefell v. Hodges "a grave mistake."

Walker doubled down on his stance that the legality of same-sex marriage should be up to the states, and cited a referendum to ban gay marriages in Wisconsin that was passed by voters in 2006. Walker, a potential 2016 GOP contender, argued the nation needs a conservative president who can appoint conservative Supreme Court justices "who will faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our land without injecting their own political agendas."
Another Village Idiot with no concept of irony or contradictory logic. All good as long as the new justices agree with Saint Scott.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:32am PT
The current meat browning and sodomy laws seem unconstitutional...?
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:32am PT
only if you're both married....to each other.
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:36am PT
Meat browning?
nature

climber
Boulder, CO
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:37am PT
don't ask Ron.... don't ask.




and yes we do need to happy gay rainbow threads (NTTIAWWT). Good point!
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:38am PT
Is that like chumming?
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:42am PT
Probably do it with a chum,...
Reeotch

climber
4 Corners Area
Jun 26, 2015 - 11:45am PT
Suggests a whole new meaning to the word "chumming", eh chum?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jun 26, 2015 - 12:07pm PT
Urban Dictionary can help...
Ksolem

Trad climber
Monrovia, California
Jun 26, 2015 - 12:20pm PT
unfettered?

As in being unaccountable to the public, having lifetime appointments, and there being no appeals process. And they get to decide not only if a law or a case is constitutional, they can rewrite the law as they see fit.

So yes, their power is "unfettered'" as in unconstrained. For example what if one Justice voted the other way on Gay marriage. Why should one person hold that kind of power over more than 300,000,000 people?

WyoRockMan

climber
South Fork of the Shoshone
Jun 26, 2015 - 12:23pm PT
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Jun 26, 2015 - 12:23pm PT
Meanwhile here's Andrew Sullivan.
The well known conservative author and commentator:
Sullivan calls himself a conservative still, and is a practicing Catholic, but he has been an enthusiastic supporter (and occasional critic) of Obama since 2007. Sullivan appears regularly on The Colbert Report and Real Time with Bill Maher on television and continues his weekly column for The Sunday Times. He lives with his husband and two hound dogs in Washington, D.C., and Provincetown, Massachusetts.
A dyed in the wool Conservative Christian Homosexual married to another Homosexual.
No wonder I've always respected his views even though I disagree with a lot of them.
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2015/06/26/it-is-accomplished/
In fact, we lost and lost and lost again. Much of the gay left was deeply suspicious of this conservative-sounding reform; two thirds of the country were opposed; the religious right saw in the issue a unique opportunity for political leverage – and over time, they put state constitutional amendments against marriage equality on the ballot in countless states, and won every time. Our allies deserted us. The Clintons embraced the Defense of Marriage Act, and their Justice Department declared that DOMA was in no way unconstitutional the morning some of us were testifying against it on Capitol Hill. For his part, president George W. Bush subsequently went even further and embraced the Federal Marriage Amendment to permanently ensure second-class citizenship for gay people in America. Those were dark, dark days.
No wonder it took a Commie, non-American, Black President to support this SCOTUS decision.
What would Romney have said? McCain?
What will Shrub, Jeb, Christie, Cruz, Huckleberry and gang say? They've all been strangely quiet today.
PAUL SOUZA

Trad climber
Central Valley, CA
Jun 26, 2015 - 12:27pm PT
We have bigger problems to worry about now... :)

HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Jun 26, 2015 - 12:34pm PT
A lot of them have already foamed at the mouth:
Fearing a huge setback to their cause, opponents of same-sex marriage, including some of the major contenders for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, are darkly warning that they will not "honor" an adverse Supreme Court decision. Some are calling for civil disobedience. Others are moving to strip the Supreme Court of its authority to decide whether gay couples should be allowed to marry, while others have questioned whether the court has that jurisdiction in the first place. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has said that such a decision would be "fundamentally illegitimate."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/who-will-fight-supreme-court-on-marriage
These intellectual midgets have a fundamental mis-understanding of the Separation of Powers principle of the Constitution.
These jackals are of the same ilk who believed that a President messing around with his aide and lying about it to a partisan congressional investigation was impeachable. Yet they would defy the Supreme Court. Their hypocrisy speaks for itself.
And in the strictest sense they are speaking treason.
Messages 61 - 80 of total 494 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta