Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Doc Holiday

Proposition 8 ruling today

36 posts in this topic

Sorry, Scalia, but this is black and white. This issue goes beyond politics. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court/2013/06/26/f0039814-d9ab-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html

Also, Prop 8 was bounced down to the lower court's decision apparently.

it was, the Cali Supreme Court struck down prop 8 and it was the appeal of that which was brought to the Supreme Court and the appeal was dismissed thus saying the Cali SC ruled correctly and prop 8 is struck down.

So short version is no more prop 8

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ron-paul.gif

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The report I read of the Prop 8 decision said it was not so much that it was kicked back to the lower court but that the plaintiffs appealing the lower courts decision to strike down Prop 8 had no standing to appeal to the SCOTUS.

 

yes, sorry for my lack of clarity, that kicks it down to the decision of the lower court as Doc Holiday said, which had ruled it was unconstitutional.  there is an important difference here tho because the Supreme Court didn't itself directly address the constitutionality, just that the plaintiffs didn't have standing.

 

still means prop 8 is unconstitutional, I was just kinda hoping for a ruling other than that.  still this was expected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DOMA unconstitutional.

 

not in its entirety

 

i mean it is unconstitutional, but the supreme court didn't strike down the entire act (this time)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WASHINGTON – Congressman Robert Pittenger (NC-09) issued this statement following today’s United States Supreme Court rulings on the federal Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8:

“Today, the Supreme Court clearly stated that individual states have the right to uphold and protect the traditional definition of marriage, and that the Supreme Court does not function as an arbiter of moral disputes.

Taking a step back from the judicial activism of the past, the Supreme Court issued two narrowly focused rulings, while correctly acknowledging that voters in North Carolina and more than 30 other states have chosen to only recognize traditional marriage.

Every American has the right to be treated with dignity and respect. At the same time, I believe our government has an obligation to support the “best practices” that lead to a stable, healthy society. Across thousands of years, multiple cultures, and diverse religions, history has shown that traditional marriage is the best way to ensure the well-being of our kids. Voters in North Carolina support traditional marriage because it leads to the best possible outcome for our children and our future.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The penultimate sentence of the majority’s opinion is a naked declaration that “[t]his opinion and its holding are confined” to those couples “joined in same-sex marriages made lawful by the State.” Ante, at 26, 25. I have heard such “bald, unreasoned disclaimer” before. Lawrence, 539 U. S., at 604. When the Court declared a constitutional right to homosexual sodomy, we were assured that the case had nothing, nothing at all to do with “whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter.” Id., at 578. Now we are told that DOMA is invalid because it “demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects,” ante, at 23—with an accompanying citation of Lawrence. It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here—when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it. I promise you this: The only thing that will “confine” the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.

 

a giant baby

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • And yes, Smitty would've been absolutely hell on wheels in MMA.
    • Smitty would've tried to have literally killed Talib for that poo he pulled on Philly in the SB.
    • SSDs are mostly good if you need fast read or write speeds, eg watching or editing large files like raw audio or video.  They won't help much for standard stuff, and are one of the larger premium price points.  They are very nice in that they produce less heat and are more stable, no spinning discs, but you won't notice much of a performance gain for general use. The biggest bang for your buck is RAM.  I always get as much RAM as I can afford.  That will improve performance of everything on the system.  Upgrade CPU/cores next, for overall performance. Again, depending on what you're doing, the graphics card can make as big a difference as anything else.  That's mostly for gaming and video playing/editing, however.  But with more and more video streaming going on, the graphics card can be very helpful to improve performance and quality.