Gay judge overturns ban on same sex marriage

[Jay Nunley]

Well shit. If Webster's is the be all and end all as opposed to the constitution, then same sex marriage is a constitutional, er Webster'stutional guarantee.

Main Entry: mar·riage
Pronunciation: \ˈmer-ij, ˈma-rij\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
Date: 14th century
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3 : an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry — J. T. Shawcross>

This is great. This means all I have to do to make "What now, bitches?" a legally enforced standard phrase all people must use after performing a task well is to get Webster's to define it as such.


Also, government is not the problem. Inefficient, corrupt, and incompetent government, where it exists, is one of many problems.

The United States of America is a mockery? I disagree completely. This is a great country. Inalienable rights endowed by the creator, all men are created equal, freedoms, the indelible American spirit, and a thousand other things make it so.

Look, I know all of this is a touchy subject. I just don't understand why it is a touchy subject. I know there are religious and aesthetic objections to homosexuality. I just don't understand how that translates to law or why it is such a big deal. All I know is that I'm glad I'm not gay. Being a fat guy is bad enough when it comes to social stigma, but I can stop being a fat guy (sort of). Gay dudes can't stop being gay.

[Lester]

So I'm defending the African-American vote, and Bob still throws the racist card... *AGAIN*.

You really lock step with your parties playbook, don't you... even when it's totally inappropriate and inaccurate.

African-American's overwhelmingly supported Prop 8, a white judge threw it out. No, I don't think it's intentional racism. But I find it funny that the press has ignored it.

[Bob Campbell]

Lester, I gotta say I believe you were being sarcastic in your "support" of the African American vote and again I'll say, while I hope Jay is correct in his opinion of you, all I can go by is the posts I've read and they appear way over the racist line way too often.
Now, go and tell us how you have black friends. That's always a good cliche to use.

The anti-gay marriage crowd is another of those wonderful contradictions of the right wing.
"We want smaller government, except we want government to keep gays from marrying...and women from having the right to choose...etc".

The right doesn't want LESS government, they just want it doing things they agree with.

[just saying]

Is now a good time to debate if being gay is a "choice" or "born gay"?
I vote CHOICE.
.......................... pandora's box .........................

[Tom Taggart]

Probably some of both--80/20%. Look at all these celebrities who were married, with children, then get a divorce & move in with their "boyfriend." Having suddenly discover they were "gay." E.g. past governor of N.J.; the Episcopal church bishop.

[just saying]

While I will agree with you in part (80/20) I think 80+% is choice and 10% is some screwed up gene pool genetic error. And the rest are just messed up all together.

[Jay Nunley]

Doubtless there are some (probably a small percentage) who choose homosexuality, but every gay person I've ever talked to about this has said they were always gay. They knew it around the same age heterosexuals begin to notice attraction to the opposite sex.

Even if it were 100% choice, what difference does it make when it comes to the law?

Also, why is no one answering my original question? I'm honestly trying to understand the objection to same sex marriage.

[just saying]

To answer your 1st question of hours ago. it goes against God's way.
Man was ment to be with a women. man vs man or gal vs gal can't pro-create.
adam & eve. simple.
If a boy likes a boy or a gal likes a gal. 95% genetic problem. (choice)
Same sex attraction is a choice is what i believe.
Experimentation sadly.

[jag]

And for those who don't believe in God?

[CoolBreeze]

[Jay Nunley]

Best.Waters.Pic.Ever.

So, it's a religious objection. Is that true for most people who object to same sex marriage or are there other reasons it is a big deal?

[The Interpreter]

It is a divisive wedge issue some exploit to achieve other, economic goals...

[Lester]

Lester, I gotta say I believe you were being sarcastic in your "support" of the African American vote and again I'll say, while I hope Jay is correct in his opinion of you, all I can go by is the posts I've read and they appear way over the racist line way too often.
Now, go and tell us how you have black friends. That's always a good cliche to use.

Once again you prove that everything that comes out of your mouth is wrong. Find one post, Bob. Just one. You'll find plenty of you accusing me of it, right out of the Journalisto playbook... but you won't find anything to back it up.

And I'm not opposed to gay marriage. I've covered that already, try to keep up.

[Bob Campbell]

Don't believe I've said anything about your opinion of gay marriage Lester, and what I've said about your lack of racial tolerance is what I have perceived from your posts. I've also said I hope it's not the actual case. I do hope it's not. To judge someone on the basis of the color of their skin, their religion or sexual preference is really beyond wrong, it's just sad. It speaks much more about the judge than the judged.

For those of you who think homosexuality is a choice, couple questions.
Is it also a choice among the non-human species who practice it? (see, benobos, a species of chimpanzee, and scads of other examples)
If it is a choice, why in the world would anyone choose a lifestyle that virtually guarantees a much harder path through life? One that means they'd be targeted for social and economic discrimination and violent attack, even murder.
Given a choice, I'd choose to be a white male. Whoops, I am one. I guess I chose that real early on.

And why does it seem that the most violent disapproval of gays on a governmental level has historically come from totalitarian societies?

And if your disapproval of gay marriage is derived from a religious basis, why do you care about someone who does not share your religious beliefs? And what of the line in the bible that says, "judge not lest ye be judged'?

[Tom Taggart]

Waste of time arguing with either idiots on the internet or liberals, but...

Over three thousand years of history, heterosexual marriage has been a key element of most civilizations.
Name one major culture or society (before our own bizarre era) where society supported homosexual marriage.

I will grant that many cultures tolerated or ignored homosexuality (just as the same can be said about prostitution); but no society in history has celebrated homosexual marriage as a fundamental tenant of their civilization.

It is, of course, the conceit of the boomers (who will go down as the most destructive generation in our country's history) that they know more than anyone else in history. One aspect of this is the declining respect for marriage, leading to the view that homosexual marriage is "no big deal" by the succeeding generations. Playing into the hands of the homosexual agenda to destroy marriage.

[DJSHOCKLEY]

Waste of time arguing with either idiots on the internet or liberals, but...

Over three thousand years of history, heterosexual marriage has been a key element of most civilizations.
Name one major culture or society (before our own bizarre era) where society supported homosexual marriage.

I will grant that many cultures tolerated or ignored homosexuality (just as the same can be said about prostitution); but no society in history has celebrated homosexual marriage as a fundamental tenant of their civilization.

It is, of course, the conceit of the boomers (who will go down as the most destructive generation in our country's history) that they know more than anyone else in history. One aspect of this is the declining respect for marriage, leading to the view that homosexual marriage is "no big deal" by the succeeding generations. Playing into the hands of the homosexual agenda to destroy marriage.

#1. You are wasting your time if you have it in your head that everyone that supports gay marriage is a Liberal... As we saw with many of Bush's buddies, there are plenty of Republicans that are in high positions that have been and are as gay as gay gets but will just lie through their teeth in order to maintain the status quo..

#2. Do some research on homosexuality outside of man, and in the animal kingdom, you may be surprised to learn that homosexuality exists in all walks of life..

#3. You sound like you are getting your version of "History" from Glen Beck, and rightwing blogs. Hate to break your heart on this one, but about .3 seconds of research on a search engine will show you that same sex unions date back to the ancient world...

#4. Destroy marriage?? It's perfectly ok for some money grubbin ho to jump from marriage to marriage, collecting alimony along the way and getting married as many times as she wants and marriage is still just super, but two people that happen to be of the same sex getting married so they can have the same basic rights as the alimony collectin Ho gets so easily, is destroying marriage??

Marriage was destroyed along time ago my friend...

The idea that it was EVER as respected as those on the extreme right/pious religious moron front want you to believe, is just a smokescreen designed to get you to back their overall agenda...

[Bob Campbell]

Waste of time arguing with either idiots on the internet or liberals, but...

Over three thousand years of history, heterosexual marriage has been a key element of most civilizations.
Name one major culture or society (before our own bizarre era) where society supported homosexual marriage.

I will grant that many cultures tolerated or ignored homosexuality (just as the same can be said about prostitution); but no society in history has celebrated homosexual marriage as a fundamental tenant of their civilization.

It is, of course, the conceit of the boomers (who will go down as the most destructive generation in our country's history) that they know more than anyone else in history. One aspect of this is the declining respect for marriage, leading to the view that homosexual marriage is "no big deal" by the succeeding generations. Playing into the hands of the homosexual agenda to destroy marriage.

For a second there, I thought you were actually going to attempt to address some of the questions I posed.

[Lester]

Don't believe I've said anything about your opinion of gay marriage Lester...

The anti-gay marriage crowd is another of those wonderful contradictions of the right wing.

Wrong.

...and what I've said about your lack of racial tolerance is what I have perceived from your posts.

I can go by is the posts I've read and they appear way over the racist line way too often.

So, in short, you went looking and couldn't find any? I guess my stance on ILLEGAL immigrants has you worked up? Well, Bob, how incredibly RACIST of you to assume that illegal immigrants are all "deeply tanned".

Now, go and tell us how you have black friends. That's always a good cliche to use.

What a racist thing to say. Why do you assume having black friends makes someone "diverse" and "racially tolerant"?

I've also said I hope it's not the actual case. I do hope it's not. To judge someone on the basis of the color of their skin, their religion or sexual preference is really beyond wrong, it's just sad. It speaks much more about the judge than the judged.

Bob hypocrisy at work there... because you're the first one to judge someone for being Christian (but that doesn't count, right?)

Given a choice, I'd choose to be a white male. Whoops, I am one. I guess I chose that real early on.

Racist.

Go look in the mirror, Bob. You appear to the be racial charged one... hiding behind a blanket of faux enlightenment.

By the way, Nunley, thanks. I appreciate the support.

Back to Nunley's original question... wasn't there some argument about insurance costs, financial burdens, etc if gay marriage were the norm? I'm assuming that was quickly shot down, as the argument only seems centers on religion now.

[AmpedNow]

Even if it were 100% choice, what difference does it make when it comes to the law?

Because it makes it harder to to claim that gay marriage is a "civil right".

Religious issues aside, I would assume that how one feels about whether or not sexual orientation can be changed is how they would feel about this law being overturned.

In this case, we have one openly homosexual judge who has single-handedly overturned 7 million votes. Hardly the poster child of an objective decision... I would suggest that maybe he wasn't the best person to make such a giant decision.

It also raises major constitutional issues, such as whether or not the judicial branch is more powerful than the will of the people... because this would mean that virtually any open election could be overturned on a whim.

It is, of course, the conceit of the boomers (who will go down as the most destructive generation in our country's history) that they know more than anyone else in history.

History books 100 years from now probably won't reflect too kindly on them, as even then, there will still be ancient ruins from their economic devastation to serve as reminders.

It has become apparent that us Xers will spend the rest of our lives attempting to correct this enormous damage being inflicted upon us and future generations. The quality of life in our golden years will be third world status.

I'm afraid that particular damage is already irreversible. It's now just a matter of keeping the entire country from collapsing under the weight of this enormous debt and entitlements.

Meanwhile, we have an out of touch, disconnected, jet-setting first couple with a "Let them have cake" attitude who doesn't seem to know or care about how tough things are out here "on the ground".

It's all the gay's fault.

[CoolBreeze]

Emotional Gay airline steward (is there any other kind?) takes it out on the passengers...

A jetBlue flight attendant upset because a passenger refused to apologize after accidentally striking him with luggage, allegedly spewed obscenities over the PA system, then activated and slid down a plane’s emergency chute before disappearing into a terminal at John F. Kennedy airport Monday, an airport official said.

JetBlue Flight 1052 from Pittsburgh had taxied to a stop at Terminal 5, Gate C around noon Monday when flight attendant Steven Slater, 38, was struck in the head with luggage that a passenger was trying to unload from an overhead compartment, according to an airport official with knowledge of the incident.

Slater demanded an apology from the passenger, the official said, but the passenger refused. The two argued before the passenger told Slater to “f— off”, the official said. The official said that Slater then got on the plane’s PA system and directed that same obscenity at all the passengers and added that he especially meant it for the man who refused to apologize.

Slater is alleged to have then activated the plane’s inflatable emergency slide, grabbed two beers from the galley, then slid down the chute, the official said.

The attendant then ran from the tarmac into the terminal, the official said. He made his way to his car and drove to his residence in Belle Harbor, Queens, the official said.

http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2010/08 ... ides-away/