11-18-2003, 02:29 PM | #1 | |
The Robot Head of Love
|
Massachusetts court rules ban on gay marriage unconstitutional
Massachusetts court rules ban on gay marriage unconstitutional I particularly like Bush's remarks: Quote:
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription...is more cowbell! |
|
11-18-2003, 02:53 PM | #2 |
Kosmonaut
|
Say what you want about our man Chretien, at least he never said anything that stupid. Oh Chretien...the memories...
[Montage of Prime Minister doing various activities: holding a press conference, speaking in the house of commons, lawn mowing, getting pied, strangling a protestor] Sigh...oh, what were we talking about? |
11-18-2003, 06:42 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 177
|
Is it doltish to put out a statement that, according to polling, 60% of Americans believe is the case?
Or is it that you believe it is doltish that Bush really believes what he is saying? If the latter, then you are of course saying that 60% of Americans are doltish. While you would get agreement from the majority at this site on that point, all polling in Canada and Europe indicates a belief in his doltishness, but a respect for the American people. That sorta' flies in the face of intellectual honesty to say the least. |
11-18-2003, 07:53 PM | #4 |
soffistical
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 460
|
However, supressing/opressing a minority in society never makes it okay because a majority wishes to do that. It doesn't matter which arguments are used when these things happens. We are all equal or not, can't be reasoned away. So say it like it is, some people are just not worth as much as I am, or shut up about it. Can't have basic rights for people and at the same time denying certain groups the very same rights.
__________________
I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on a disc somewhere. My DVDs | My Photos | TorrentMind Last edited by emma; 11-18-2003 at 08:26 PM. |
11-18-2003, 09:30 PM | #5 |
A search for a crazy man!
|
Hooray for Massachusetts!
I already expect Bush to have the feelings he does; I'm over it. However, it pleases me that a judicial court would rule this way. It's not something I WOULDN'T expect, but it's not something I'd have been certain about either.
__________________
Chris "News Editor" Remo Some sort of Writer or Editor or Something, Idle Thumbs "Some comparisons are a little less obvious. I always think of Grim Fandango as Casablanca on acid." - Will Wright |
11-19-2003, 01:12 AM | #6 |
Whinging Pom
|
I'd just like to point out theres a difference between a legal marriage and a religious marriage. I think Bush is confusing the matter, which is especially wrong in a country that is supposedly secular. The issue should have nothing to do with the religious defnition of marriage at all, and merely the extension of rights gained in the legal act of marriage to anyone who wants to make that commitment. The sooner he accepts that the better for everyone.
__________________
Dom Currently Playing Tex Murphey - Under a Killing Moon (YAY GOG.com!) Recently Completed Broken Sword Director's Cut Still Get Mozilla Firefox! Forget that Chrome and IE rubbish! |
11-19-2003, 01:47 AM | #7 |
Puts the 'e' in Mark
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,138
|
May God Bless America.
Secular? |
11-19-2003, 02:52 AM | #8 |
The Reggienator
|
America, the country I'll never be able to fully understand.
That Bush guy surely is a strange man... |
11-19-2003, 03:49 AM | #9 | ||
comfortably numb
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 541
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
11-19-2003, 04:08 AM | #10 |
Liver of Life
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,317
|
Some people seem to follow a set of non-existant universal World Laws to base their judgement. I doubt there's anything said in "World Law" about Gay marriages being wrong or illegal. Nor is there any such thing in the Constitution, as far as my knowledge goes.
|
11-19-2003, 05:21 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,459
|
A lot of people seem to think it says so in the bible anyway... (note: I'm not saying it does)
... don't get me started on Bush. Last edited by Ninja Dodo; 11-19-2003 at 05:32 AM. |
11-19-2003, 08:20 AM | #12 | |
big, hairy and blue
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 349
|
Quote:
__________________
Âż? |
|
11-19-2003, 08:36 AM | #13 |
:P ^^^ at tamz
|
It should be noted that the court case ruling doesn't mandate the state to marry the two "plaintiffs" (or whatever they're called). All it's doing is giving the state's legislative branch (that's funny-langue for "Congress") 180 days (I think that's the term, anywho) to come up with a semantic loophole to the legal marriage/religious marriage thing (most likely, the same "civil unions" that Vermont allows), or to amend the state's consitution, so that the court ruling becomes irrelevant. The state's governor is really opposed to letting two people of the same gender marry (and has the congress on his side, IIRC), so the latter is a lot more likely than it'd usually be (in the US, consitutional amendments are ass-harder to pass than laws).
And don't kindle the flame.
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth --Spammo-head, "Windbag" |
11-19-2003, 09:50 AM | #14 | |
Puts the 'e' in Mark
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,138
|
Quote:
|
|
11-19-2003, 10:22 AM | #15 | |
Liver of Life
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,317
|
Quote:
Why must one religion dictate the way the country lives? |
|
11-19-2003, 10:29 AM | #16 |
:P ^^^ at tamz
|
One of the points brought up by a friend of mine is that if it was/were a full-on marriage, instead of a civil marriage, then if, say, a church denied you the right to wed under their services solely based on your genders, you would be able to sue (or, hypothetically, be able to win a lawsuit). I'm not an expert, so I can't confirm or deny that statement.
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth --Spammo-head, "Windbag" |
11-19-2003, 10:45 AM | #17 | |
AKA Morte
|
Quote:
|
|
11-19-2003, 11:00 AM | #18 |
:P ^^^ at tamz
|
Why?
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth --Spammo-head, "Windbag" |
11-19-2003, 11:07 AM | #19 |
AKA Morte
|
Because it would be against the law?
|
11-19-2003, 12:59 PM | #20 |
:P ^^^ at tamz
|
What law?
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth --Spammo-head, "Windbag" |