Prop 8 [Archive] - Project 1999

fwaits

08-04-2010, 08:21 PM

The state Supreme Court legalized same sex marriages, then months later a group put Prop 8 on the ballot and it narrowly passed, invalidating the prior ruling. Now some people and the city of SF sued saying that Prop 8 violated their Constitutional rights of equality. Today a federal court judge sided in their favor saying it was unconstitutional. It will now likely go to an appeal court and possibly the US Supreme Court for final ruling.

Desert

08-04-2010, 08:25 PM

I wish we as a state could just move on from petty shit like race and sexual preference to more pressing matters...like Prop 19 :D

jyaku

08-04-2010, 08:52 PM

i wish we could do all that as a country. more so for prop 19

Aarone

08-04-2010, 08:57 PM

The guy on the left is why California sucks.
The guy on the right is why California wins.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs287.snc4/40699_1549665298675_1146373033_31578982_7619833_n. jpg

I'd be willing to extend this comment from California to America in general.

Desert

08-04-2010, 11:22 PM

pretty good example of west coast punk imo, his bowling shoes top off his ensemble

Vanech

08-05-2010, 06:59 AM

I have to point out that the guy holding the 'god hates fags' poster is standing in a much more... gay stance than the guy on the right.. like he should have his elbows turned in with a purse on the elbow of one of the other...

I'm gonna re-post something I stuck up on my friends facebook because it is oh-so-relevant- to the discussion at hand...

Everyone had the right to be happy in their life status - and not a single one of us, judge, magistrate, or* common person has the right to deny anyone of that right "life. liberty and the pursuit of happiness'? So what right do you bass-akwards misanthropes have to say what is and isn't correct?

Fuck all of you that thrive on destroying what tiny happiness others are able to derive from their lives... Shit is much too short and much too apocalypse ridden to have some random bible thumping terrorists (yes I said it, because religion is all about terror) telling them how they should be happy.

Yea, I went there! America makes a big deal about the separation of Church and State - You're Dogma shouldn't have any bearing upon laws, and if you really give a fuck about George Takai, or Clive Barker marrying their husbands, then maybe you should take a reality check and re-establish what age you are, because the attitude of the religious majority is the same exact voice of a twelve year old who is pissed that there are no more cinnamon rolls available at milk break.

Grow up and get real.

'nuff said.

*edit nor = or, because nor following not is a double negative, or something... maybe?

ukaking

08-05-2010, 08:19 AM

Best part of that picture is the image of the fags on dudes sign and the punker's bird legs and positioning of his feet.

Lucrio40

08-05-2010, 08:54 AM

The guy on the left is from Kansas, not California.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church

Personally on prop 8 I think they should of went for equality in the other direction, rather than legalize gay marriage they should of made all marriage illegal. Marriage should not be a political or legal institution.

Hasbinbad

08-05-2010, 12:11 PM

Personally on prop 8 I think they should of went for equality in the other direction, rather than legalize gay marriage they should of made all marriage illegal. Marriage should not be a political or legal institution.
A government incentive for individuals pairing up has proven to be good for the people as a whole. I think that domestic partnerships should continue for that reason, but I agree that it shouldn't be called marriage, or have anything to do with any religion.

mmiles8

08-05-2010, 12:29 PM

One thing to stop and consider. If straight marriages went up for a vote, how many men do you think would vote to ban it? Im just sayin.

Daywolf

08-05-2010, 12:35 PM

The guy on the left is from Kansas, not California.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
My first thought was that it was staged for the media (it's a setup -n- pose flat out). At least south, I never saw a poster like that, it's not like that at ALL. It's not just gay marriage they are protesting/voting against, it opens the door for about anything. But typical, another judge ruling from the bench, which should be alarming no matter what side or non-side you are on. We have - had democratic voting process, which seems to be falling apart every post-November.

Extunarian

08-05-2010, 12:40 PM

But typical, another judge ruling from the bench

Ummm...I think they are generally expected to rule from the bench. Perhaps you meant legislate from the bench?

Please think about how the civil rights movement would have worked out in the South if equal rights for blacks were simply left to a vote. A democratic process shouldn't be a blank check for the slimmest majority to oppress any minority it chooses, and that's why we have a judiciary empowered to correct such injustices.

Daywolf

08-05-2010, 12:48 PM

slimmest majority7 million slimes in this case, eh? Ruling the state/country from a bench is epic fail (absence of democratic voting process). So go on with your faulty comparisons and petty name calling :(

Extunarian

08-05-2010, 01:30 PM

Slimmest is the superlative form of slim. I see how you were confused though, as you thought I wrote slimiest. I also re-read my post and I really don't see any name calling there.

A judge issues rulings from the bench, i.e. they 'rule from the bench.' You clearly meant to imply they change or create laws from the bench, otherwise known as 'legislating from the bench.'

And yes, in this case the democratic voting process did take place, however the amendment to the constitution of California was deemed unconstitutional by a Federal judge being guided by the Federal constitution. In fact, the reason the California constitution even needed to be amended was because the CA supreme court said a law banning same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.

The democratic process still has another avenue - we could just amend the Federal constitution to ban these unions, and then the courts could not overturn these laws. See? Checks and balances.

Hasbinbad

08-05-2010, 01:35 PM

7 million slimes in this case, eh? Ruling the state/country from a bench is epic fail (absence of democratic voting process). So go on with your faulty comparisons and petty name calling :(
Fuck you and democracy. Democracy is the leadership by the ignorant masses, and I for one have had quite enough of that bullshit, given that our ignorant masses are much more ignorant (and massive.. ..c wat i did ther?) than most. About time someone with some power stood up and said "this is fucking retarded."

guineapig

08-05-2010, 01:37 PM

Fuck you and democracy. Democracy is the leadership by the ignorant masses, and I for one have had quite enough of that bullshit, given that our ignorant masses are much more ignorant (and massive.. ..c wat i did ther?) than most. About time someone with some power stood up and said "this is fucking retarded."

Have to agree with Hasbin on this one.

Lucrio40

08-05-2010, 01:46 PM

guineapig

08-05-2010, 01:48 PM

That sounds like some 1984 stuff right there.

1984 is closer to what we have now.

Hasbinbad

08-05-2010, 01:57 PM

That sounds like some 1984 stuff right there.
Yeah.. I think a bunch of these rednecks need to go to Room 101.

Lucrio40

08-05-2010, 02:12 PM

Ever think that the people on top are the reasons why people are so ignorant? I'd say ignorant masses are easier to govern and control than those who're well informed and intelligent.

Hasbinbad

08-05-2010, 02:17 PM

Ever think that the people on top are the reasons why people are so ignorant? I'd say ignorant masses are easier to govern and control than those who're well informed and intelligent.
Ehh.. I had to face those same odds, and I would consider myself decently well informed relative to most people in this society. You can blame the powers that be for a lot, but individual ignorance - to a certain extent - is the product of individual laziness.

guineapig

08-05-2010, 02:17 PM

Ever think that the people on top are the reasons why people are so ignorant? I'd say ignorant masses are easier to govern and control than those who're well informed and intelligent.

Other way around...

The current people that are in power often get there due to the ignorance of the population.

Them being there is not what causes said ignorance.

Daywolf

08-05-2010, 02:51 PM

That sounds like some 1984 stuff right there.Yup. 1 vs. 7 million. 1 wins. Apply it to anything is the point, no matter what side of the fence in any issue. It's wrong. These libs chase minority rule, talk shit against the nature of my fellow citizens as if they are dolts. Their fools, and as in 1984, on the verge of starting a big dirty war (Iran etc) to keep/build their power. I'm not Rep or Dem, but for sure I'll be voting against the Dems this time around. I mean what votes are worth... :(

Note: retraction of slime etc. Shouldn't speed read when outside lol

Troy

08-05-2010, 03:08 PM

Damn judges expecting laws to be in line with the Constitution; don't they understand that God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve?

</sarcasm, just to be clear>

Extunarian

08-05-2010, 03:17 PM

Libs chasing minority rule? Take a look at how many times the republicans have used the filibuster in this congress to rule with a 41-59 minority.

The courts are obligated to interpret laws - and often that means one judge or a small panel will overrule something enacted by a far greater number. However we also grant veto power to executives, who can use it to unilaterally overrule their legislative body. And just as a legislature can overrule a veto, Judges' decisions can be overruled by changing laws or amending constitutions.

Allizia

08-05-2010, 03:21 PM

I got asked what country Norway was in by some friends in college when I was planning a trip there =/ sad times. I swear I'm the only person I know that can accurately spell most 5+ letter words as well, it's downright embarrassing sometimes.

guineapig

08-05-2010, 03:45 PM

Yup. 1 vs. 7 million. 1 wins. Apply it to anything is the point, no matter what side of the fence in any issue. It's wrong. These libs chase minority rule, talk shit against the nature of my fellow citizens as if they are dolts. Their fools, and as in 1984, on the verge of starting a big dirty war (Iran etc) to keep/build their power. I'm not Rep or Dem, but for sure I'll be voting against the Dems this time around. I mean what votes are worth... :(

Have you read 1984?

Extunarian

08-05-2010, 03:55 PM

guineapig

08-05-2010, 03:56 PM

Ha I missed that. "On the verge of starting a big dirty war (Iran etc)."

And 1984 wasn't a pre-war book by any stretch of the imagination... :)

Toony

08-05-2010, 04:03 PM

Ha I missed that. "On the verge of starting a big dirty war (Iran etc)."

Hello? I believe we are already in 2 of them? If only I could remember what party controlled both houses of congress and the white house in 2001-2002...

All these dirty republicans voted for the authorization of military force against Iraq in 2002: Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, John Breaux, Maria Cantwell, Jean Carnahan, Tom Carper, Max Cleland, Hillary Clinton, Tom Daschle, Chris Dodd, Byron Dorgan, John Edwards, Dianne Feinstein, Tom Harkin, Fritz Hollings, Tim Johnson, John Kerry, Herb Kohl, Mary Landrieu, Joseph Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, Zell Miller, Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, Chuck Schumer, Bob Torricelli

Er wait...

guineapig

08-05-2010, 04:14 PM

This is veering so far off topic at this point...

Point is that 1984 was a great book which many people on the forums have apparently not read and like to cite as an example, albeit poorly.

Oh, and also Prop 8 has been overturned!

makoho

08-05-2010, 06:54 PM

7 million slimes in this case, eh? Ruling the state/country from a bench is epic fail (absence of democratic voting process). So go on with your faulty comparisons and petty name calling :(

Maybe if people wouldn't try to force their "moral" view of human relationships into democracy this wouldnt need to happen, but it did.

Hasbinbad

08-05-2010, 08:08 PM

And 1984 wasn't a pre-war book by any stretch of the imagination... :)
..although I've heard an interpretation that stated that there actually was no war, even that there was no eurasia or eastasia.. ..that oceania was in fact a global state.. ..that Goldstein never existed. It was all manufactured to keep the proles and the "outer" party in a constant state of terror. Manufacturing Consent anyone?

Qaedain

08-05-2010, 08:48 PM

But typical, another judge ruling from the bench

Good to see that it didn't take very long for the bigots to show up and fight for inequality and establishmentarianism with straw man arguments.

The Bill of Rights and the First Amendment are bullshit anyways.

Elissa

08-06-2010, 01:31 PM

Good to see that it didn't take very long for the bigots to show up and fight for inequality and establishmentarianism with straw man arguments.

The Bill of Rights and the First Amendment are bullshit anyways.

^^

guineapig

08-06-2010, 02:18 PM

..although I've heard an interpretation that stated that there actually was no war, even that there was no eurasia or eastasia.. ..that oceania was in fact a global state.. ..that Goldstein never existed. It was all manufactured to keep the proles and the "outer" party in a constant state of terror. Manufacturing Consent anyone?

I do enjoy modern interpretations of the classics. I have heard this one as well but I doubt it was the original intent of the author.

Matrix Revolutions (which was a huge pile of crap of a movie by the way) had a really good fan made plot. Short version: Zion is just a Matrix within The Matrix for the 10% of humans that reject the virtual world that was created for them by the Machines. Neo was nothing more than a machine himself. Pretty bleak shit but would have made for a far better movie ending.

There is actually a ton of dialog AND EVENTS in the movie that supports this theory but sadly the Wachowski's never thought of this themselves (their writing simply isn't that great) or we would have seen a 4th movie by now.

Um.... oh yeah and GO EQUAL RIGHTS TO ALL!!!

yaaaflow

08-06-2010, 02:36 PM

..although I've heard an interpretation that stated that there actually was no war, even that there was no eurasia or eastasia.. ..that oceania was in fact a global state.. ..that Goldstein never existed. It was all manufactured to keep the proles and the "outer" party in a constant state of terror. Manufacturing Consent anyone?

I actually thought that was the generally accepted interpretation of 1984 tbh. What with the suddenly switching from being at war with eurasia to eastasia and "we have always been at war with eastasia" propaganda. Just manufactured drama to keep everyone scared/in line. I never did read it for a class though, so I didn't do a whole ton of deep thought on it.
/derail

back on topic, I too hope that you can one day marry the man of your dreams Hasbin.

guineapig

08-06-2010, 02:54 PM

I actually thought that was the generally accepted interpretation of 1984 tbh. What with the suddenly switching from being at war with eurasia to eastasia and "we have always been at war with eastasia" propaganda. Just manufactured drama to keep everyone scared/in line. I never did read it for a class though, so I didn't do a whole ton of deep thought on it.
/derail

/em continues to derail

Sort of. The war itself was real but it "ceased to exist" due to it's perpetuation. It was the permanence of war that guaranteed the permanence of order. Hence the slogan "War is Peace".

Let's not forget that atomic bombing was ceased due to it's ability to cause an inbalance in the powers which neither of the super-states wanted. This is leaked information in the book, not common knowledge. Therefor it is more than likely what Orwell considered the truth.

What's more open to interpretation is how the three super-states were actually related. At the very least they all shared a similar idea of how to keep their people under control regardless of whether or not it was one super-state.
But that's what's so great about these older novels, that it lets the reader think about it instead of simply pasting the answer to every question on the last few pages.