NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling - Page 4 - TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
Sentrius
USA Fan
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
17929 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

Although I do not think this should be voted on because I consider it a civil right, I am on record of stating "WHATEVER WORKS MAN". I make no bones about that.


So you don't care how gay marriage is legalized? Just that it's legalized?

Even if there may be negative consequences from rushing into this so fast?






Back to top
BeeFense5
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Kenna
Member since Jul 2010
17011 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

I am on record of stating "WHATEVER WORKS MAN". I make no bones about that.


So you should be ok with the opposition employing the same "whatever works" strategy then, correct?






Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
5112 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


What I can't stand to read are things like what Montana Senator Tester said:

quote:

I’m proud to support marriage equality because no one should be able to tell a Montanan or any American who they can love and who they can marry.”


What a crock of s***. This whole government gay marriage thing is about money---not love, not even marriage in it's basic sense.

What can a justice of peace in Mamou bestow on a couple that means "love" or even commitment.

I do believe some people have become so secular and so enthralled by government that they actually feel no commitment to their partners unless some agent of government collects a $25 license fee from them and gives them a piece of government paper.

I prefer the government get out of the marriage business all together.



This post was edited on 3/26 at 9:20 pm


Back to top
Toddy
Ole Miss Fan
Atlanta
Member since Jul 2010
20423 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

So you should be ok with the opposition employing the same "whatever works" strategy then, correct?



They ALREADY do.






Back to top
baybeefeetz
the now
Member since Sep 2009
13490 posts
 Online 

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

I don't understand what you're talking about. They aren't ready to issue a brad ruling. Give it another then years and they will though.


Who the frick is brad?






Back to top
asurob1
Florida State Fan
On the edge of the galaxy
Member since May 2009
10655 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

I want Gay Marriage rights, too. But, if the find lack of standing, i DAMNED sure want them to follow the "rules" and deny the case.


this plus 1






Back to top
GumboPot
LSU Fan
Saints Fan
Member since Mar 2009
23727 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

Who the frick is brad?


I think he meant broad and not the female kind. The antonym of narrow.






Back to top
baybeefeetz
the now
Member since Sep 2009
13490 posts
 Online 

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


It was a Freudian slip.





Back to top
Nuts4LSU
LSU Fan
Washington, DC
Member since Oct 2003
18174 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

If they know they are going to throw it out because of the lack of standing then they could just refuse to hear it and it would have the same legal effect without wasting the Court's time.


I see you're working that law degree again. No, refusing to hear it would not have the same effect as dismissing it for lack of standing. The former would leave the 9th Circuit ruling in effect. The latter strikes it down.

quote:

I didn't say they would be "intimidated". It just will look anti democratic if the SCOTUS allows two politicians to overturn the will of the people by simply refusing to do their job which is to defend the will of the people in court.


So what if the Supreme Court looks anti-democratic? That's what they are supposed to be. They aren't elected and serve for life for a reason: to make them independent of political (i.e. democratic) pressures.

quote:

If the SCOTUS rules that they have no standing then SCOTUS is ruling that the voters who passed Prop 8 do not have the right to have someone represent their position in court and defend the constitutional legality of Prop 8.


It was wrong the first time you said it and it's still wrong the second time. The voters who passed Prop 8 DO have someone to represent their position in court. They have the attorney general of California (or whatever their equivalent is called). He/she chose not to pursue the case. A SCOTUS ruling that some special interest group does not have standing is irrelevant to that question.

quote:

If you don't allow them the right then it will look like the SCOTUS supports the tyranny of the minority since the two politicians who opposed Prop 8 will effectively overturn the will of the voters by simply refusing to do the job that they are mandated by law to do which is to defend the will of the majority of voters of California in court.


Who cares what "it will look like"? The Supreme Court isn't there to make it look like they are doing whatever the majority want. They are there to rule according to law, including telling the majority to go frick itself sometimes. It's set up this way intentionally so that they are independent of political influence.

quote:

So you are going to argue that the voters who passed Prop 8 aren't directly involved in the case.


A ruling that they don't have standing would be based on that conclusion. I don't know how the court will rule. In general, voters are not "directly involved" in a legal sense in the effects of the elections or propositions they vote in/on.

For the same reason that you can't institute a criminal prosecution against someone if the D.A. decides not to, you can't start litigating on behalf of the state to uphold its laws if the A.G. decides not to. The law designates who has that responsibility and right, and you didn't make the cut.



This post was edited on 3/27 at 7:51 am


Back to top
Nuts4LSU
LSU Fan
Washington, DC
Member since Oct 2003
18174 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

They just had a vote in one of the most far left states in the country -- the People's Republic of Maryland. And, in f*cking Maryland, it only got 52% of the vote.


Gay marriage did not just get support from the so-called far left in Maryland. Substantial portions of what you call the far left voted against gay marriage. In particular, the African-American and Hispanic demographics, both of which voted overwhelmingly Democratic in the elections, voted against gay marriage. But it still passed. That should tell you that gay marriage isn't just winning with the so-called "far left", it's winning with centrist voters, too. Even more significant is the fact that opinion polls are showing that the percentage of gay marriage supporters who say their vote is influenced by this issue is growing.

More people are supporting gay marriage, and more of them are making it a significant issue in their voting decisions. That is why Democrats consider this a winning issue for them and a losing issue for the GOP going forward. It's also why a growing number of high-profile Republicans are switching their positions. Gay people who want to get married are a small percentage of the population, but people who think everyone deserves fair and equal treatment are a much larger percentage.






Back to top
Fox Mulder
Tulane Fan
Austin, TX
Member since Dec 2010
21630 posts
 Online 

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

you're afraid they aren't ready to ignore the Constitutionally defined federal powers?

seriously...what the frick is wrong with you?


In case you've been living on the moon, the Court has been ignoring their defined powers for over. 80 years all while wiping their arse with the constitution. They're a joke.






Back to top
DawgfaninCa
Georgia Fan
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
3239 posts
 Online 

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:



I see you're working that law degree again. No, refusing to hear it would not have the same effect as dismissing it for lack of standing. The former would leave the 9th Circuit ruling in effect. The latter strikes it down.


Let's analyse this.

The SCOTUS dismisses the case for lack of standing - Same sex marriage is legal in California.

The SCOTUS refuses to hear the case - Same sex marriage is legal in California.

What's the difference?

I'll answer my own question to save you the time.

Nothing!!!

quote:

So what if the Supreme Court looks anti-democratic? That's what they are supposed to be. They aren't elected and serve for life for a reason: to make them independent of political (i.e. democratic) pressures.


It's one thing for the SCOTUS to overturn Prop 8 because they find it unconstitutional but if they overturn it on a BS legal technicality that 2 politicians who are opposed to Prop 8 used to thwart the will of the voters of California then they will look like they don't care about the will of the majority and support the tyranny of the minority.

quote:

It was wrong the first time you said it and it's still wrong the second time. The voters who passed Prop 8 DO have someone to represent their position in court. They have the attorney general of California (or whatever their equivalent is called). He/she chose not to pursue the case. A SCOTUS ruling that some special interest group does not have standing is irrelevant to that question.


I was right the first time and I'm right the second time.

Brown and Harris who are both opposed to Prop 8 refused to defend Prop 8 in court even though they are mandated to do so. It's a BS legal technicality that they used to thwart the will of the voters of California and the SCOTUS shouldn't allow it to succeed.

quote:

Who cares what "it will look like"? The Supreme Court isn't there to make it look like they are doing whatever the majority want. They are there to rule according to law, including telling the majority to go frick itself sometimes. It's set up this way intentionally so that they are independent of political influence.


I don't need you to lecture me about the legal duty of the SCOTUS.

I'm just telling you it won't look good for the SCOTUS to dismiss the case on a BS legal technicality.

quote:

A ruling that they don't have standing would be based on that conclusion. I don't know how the court will rule. In general, voters are not "directly involved" in a legal sense in the effects of the elections or propositions they vote in/on.


Usually, a Governor and Attorney General don't refuse to defend a law that the people passed so this is a special case where they do refuse to defend it because they are both oppose to it.

The SCOTUS should and can take that into consideration.


quote:

For the same reason that you can't institute a criminal prosecution against someone if the D.A. decides not to, you can't start litigating on behalf of the state to uphold its laws if the A.G. decides not to. The law designates who has that responsibility and right, and you didn't make the cut.


That's a criminal case. This is a civil case. Because of the fact that Brown and Harris both refuse to defend Prop 8 the SCOTUS should allow the proponents of PROP 8 to defend it since their vote is directly affected by the Court's decision.







Back to top
Bear Is Dead
LSU Fan
Monroe
Member since Nov 2007
3496 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

I'm just telling you it won't look good for the SCOTUS to dismiss the case on a BS legal technicality.

its their job, not to mention it happens all of the time. Shouldnt look good or bad, it just is what it is.






Back to top
tigerfoot
LA-Monroe Fan
Alexandria
Member since Sep 2006
17305 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

don't need you to lecture me about the legal duty of the SCOTUS.
quote:

I'm just telling you it won't look good for the SCOTUS to dismiss the case on a BS legal technicality


Don't let the law get in the way. Cool






Back to top
CITWTT
LSU Fan
baton rouge
Member since Sep 2005
31765 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


You must be all tingly by now.





Back to top
JEAUXBLEAUX
LSU Fan
Bayonne, NJ
Member since May 2006
44498 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


So is the Supreme Court going to tap dance around the issue?





Back to top
CITWTT
LSU Fan
baton rouge
Member since Sep 2005
31765 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


Evidently it will and wait for something they should really give a frick about later. Toddy and his woman can move to the West coast and be all happy with each other.





Back to top
DawgfaninCa
Georgia Fan
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
3239 posts
 Online 

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:


Don't let the law get in the way. Cool


The voters of California know what the law really is and that Brown and Harris did not do their mandated duty to defend it in the courts.







Back to top
junkfunky
LSU Fan
Member since Jan 2011
13115 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

It was a Freudian slip.








Back to top
SammyTiger
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
9252 posts

re: NBC : SCOTUS not prepared to issue sweeping gay rights ruling


quote:

The voters of California know what the law really is and that Brown and Harris did not do their mandated duty to defend it in the cour


I believe they defended it in lower courts, but didn't feel like the needed to bring it all the way to the supreme court. I don't think they are obligated to do so.






Back to top


Back to top




//