Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FUCK YOU, CAL SUPREMES!!!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:47 PM
Original message
FUCK YOU, CAL SUPREMES!!!
:grr:

You listened to Mormon bullshit ~~ that was not the voice of the Cal Voters. That was outside money coming into our state and turning around an election for their own little twisted interest group.

As a Californian and as a California attorney all I can say to you, the Cal Supremes is:



Little me to Big you:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hey ...where can I get one of those red fuck you keys?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. LOL....
...wouldn't that be a nice addition to a keyboard for times like this.

I am soooooooo totally pissed ~~ and what is REALLY getting to me? The RW bigot assholes who are out celebrating that some of us are treated less equally than others!

Fuck that shit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rebubula Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. RW bigot assholes...
...now, I agree that they are a MAJOR road block in this whole thing - let us NOT FORGET that our own President\VP does NOT support gay marriage.

We have plenty of people with a 'D' next to their name that are still against equal rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. This bullshit hits me just like the bullshit when certain states did not...
...allow different races to intermarry.

This is wrong...just plain fucking wrong and I am steamed. This is about treating EVERYONE equally. Seems like suddenly it is the "politically correct" thing for those D-people to make nice-nice with the fundies.

Fuck that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rebubula Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Making Nice?
I am not exactly sure what you are saying, but if you are saying that these people are espousing unfair policy stands just to appease some fundies - I would say that has nothing to do with it...OK...not much.

For many people, this is a religious issue and there are many on our side that still cling to outdated mythology. I have seen nothing from President Obama to contradict that theory. He seems to be opposed to the issue on his own merits; not on the hope that some asshole will vote for him.

And yes...fuck playing nice with fundies. I do what I have to in order to succeed in my line of business and support my family (as it relates to dealing with fundie assholes), but in personal situations no one gets a pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thank you for the Recs....
Edited on Tue May-26-09 02:52 PM by Hepburn
...I am pissed as hell. What they Cal Supremes did is WRONG. They did take away rights. No way around that!

:grr:

We will fight on....!!!

Edit for typo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. Don't forget Lilly Allen's song, "Fuck You":
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. Link to FREE pro-gay marriage stickers:
From Helderheid's OP on the greatest page:

https://act.credoaction.com/stickers/?r_by=-250172-j0CS6Zx&rc=taf.stickers&sp=i_love_love

I figure it cannot hurt to post this link everywhere possible!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regnaD kciN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. Well, the ruling is that minority rights can be superceded by popular vote...
...so let's start an initiative in California declaring that "freedom of religion" only applies to religions that were present at the time of the adoption of the Bill of Rights (i.e. not Mormons).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Well, I think all of us Californians NEED to do something to...
...wipe this trash off the face of our state.

I am not only pissed ~~ I am totally embarrassed!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Staph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Yes!!
Scientologists won't be allowed freedom of religion either!


(My sympathies to all in California -- your Supreme Court sucks!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
10. That red key is awesome!
Let GLBT people wed!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Can you imagine having that key on your keyboard!
:evilgrin:

There are some things that really and truly deserve a giant FUCK YOU. Today's Cal Supreme ruling is most certainly right at the top of that list.

I am soooooooooo mega pissed....:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. Me too!
Edited on Tue May-26-09 03:34 PM by proteus_lives
I hate the fact that people aren't allowed to be happy and equal. It's backward and unworthy of an American court. :grr:


"Can you imagine having that key on your keyboard!"

On many days I'd be pounding away at it like it dispensed cigarettes and orgasms! ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. LOL....
...to funny! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
14. As an attorney, please explain why they're wrong, then
Morally I agree with you 100%. Legally, I don't see what else they could have done, but I'm interested in eharing your argument.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S147999.PDF is the previous decision from last year about the legality of prop 22, as opposed to prop 8 which modified the consitutional rather than the legislative environment.

This is today's opinion: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S168047.PDF I haven't finished reading it yet, but in essence it hinges on the question of whether prop 8 is a revision or an amendment of the state constitution (which was one of the arguments made by opponents) and conludes that it is a valid amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. I agree with Justice Moreno's dissent:
Proposition 8 is invalid because it is not a lawful amendment of the constitution. In essence, it alters the equal protection clause to deny same-sex couples equal treatment. IMO, a majority cannot vote away the rights of a minority.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. It's strongly argued, but I wonder...
although prop 8 has the effect of denying rights to gay people (to marry others of the same sex), the distinction seems to be that it's marriage which is being amended rather than rights directly.

Thus, if Prop 8 said 'only heterosexuals are allowed to marry in CA', that would clearly violate the state EP clause. But by amending the definition of marriage, it trickily circumvents this. In other words, if I'm gay, I can still get married - to a person of the opposite sex. That said Moreno makes good points about the cases cited by the majority and the extrapolations drawn from those.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. I still am at this point:
What effectively took place ~~ even if the Cal Const was legally amended ~~ is that a majority took rights from a minority. I see these rights as CONTRACT RIGHTS. And gender, sexual orientation, etc., has NO place in the discussion of contract law.

To me, one of the most important pillars of justice is that a minority is protected from the tyranny of any majority. It was wrong what was done ~~ legally wrong ~~ even tho the Cal Supremes dealt with the fantasy that the amendment was done in a permissible way. What a fucking cop out.

Also: I see the "marriage" issues as basic contract law. Two consenting adults DO have a right to alter the legal relationships between themselves by forming a different/new contract between themselves through making an agreement which the state sanctions, empowers and enforces. Well, that held true until Prop 8. My issue is: Why is gender an element in regard to contract rights and/or contract law? I simply do not see this. Marriage is nothing more than a civil contract. PERIOD. Why are those of a particular sexual orientation denied this right? There is no legal principle which supports that contention.

JMHO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Quite
Although it's interesting to note that the main opinion explicitly says CUs must have identical scope and that that the marriage thing is strictly a semantic reservation, muddying the waters further. Personally, I put most of the blame on our broken constitutional/ballot initiative system, which mandates the same threshold for constitutional changes as for legislative ones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
19. Justice George said
that Proposition 8 did not “entirely repeal or abrogate” the right to such a protected relationship, but argued that it “carves out a narrow and limited exception to these state constitutional rights, reserving the official designation of the term ‘marriage’ for the union of opposite-sex couples as a matter of state constitutional law.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/27marriage.html?hp

So now they are going to carve out "narrow and limited exceptions????" They are gerrymandering the law. What will be the next little niche carved out.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HOLOS Donating Member (390 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
21. k&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC