Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Proposition 8 officially struck down.

Proposition 8 officially struck down.
Thread Tools
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 02:49 PM
 
The 9th Circuit Court in California struck down the state's voter-passed ban on gay marriage, ruling 2-1 that it violates the rights of gay Californians.

Originally Posted by Judge Reinhardt
Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.
The Court concludes that the law violates the 14th Amendment rights of gay couples to equal protection under the law.
Triumph over bigotry!
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 02:52 PM
 
For the time being.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 03:18 PM
 
Also, can't wait to see the GOP Primary candidates make retarded statements regarding this.
     
Atheist
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 03:18 PM
 
I'm not confident the Supreme Court will uphold the ruling. I think they'd rather just let the states fight it out.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 03:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Also, can't wait to see the GOP Primary candidates make retarded statements regarding this.
Probably involving the term "activist judges"?
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 05:07 PM
 
The FLDS lawyers are preparing their amicus curiae for the next round of hearings.
45/47
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 08:21 PM
 
Pigeon: Prop 8 is still the law of California. It was ruled against in a 2-1 decision by the 9th Circuit, but it hasn't been "officially struck down" anymore than it was "officially struck down" at previous court levels. It now goes on to the SCOTUS, which can either accept the appeal or reject it. If the appeal is rejected or the appeal is accepted and then the SCOTUS rejects it, only then is it "officially struck down." Nothing like jumping the gun.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 08:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
The FLDS lawyers are preparing their amicus curiae for the next round of hearings.
You are aware that a slippery slope argument is a fallacy, right?

There's absolutely no reason to think that because gays are permitted to marry that polygamy must also be legal. There is no logical relationship between these two ideas whatsoever.
     
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 08:51 PM
 
Time to secede, South California. Don't let the door hit you...
     
ironknee
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 09:40 PM
 
right on for human rights
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 10:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
You are aware that a slippery slope argument is a fallacy, right?

There's absolutely no reason to think that because gays are permitted to marry that polygamy must also be legal. There is no logical relationship between these two ideas whatsoever.
There is, for those who have nothing else to fall back on except the same tired old nonsense. One more step; great news!
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 10:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
There is, for those who have nothing else to fall back on except the same tired old nonsense. One more step; great news!
It's truly sad that the guy making stupendousman type arguments about gay marriage not contributing to society is winning tonight in three states.
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 11:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
There's absolutely no reason to think that because gays are permitted to marry that polygamy must also be legal. There is no logical relationship between these two ideas whatsoever.
That wasn't the connection. The Mormon Church donated a crap ton of money to get the amendment on the ballot.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2012, 11:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Pigeon: Prop 8 is still the law of California. It was ruled against in a 2-1 decision by the 9th Circuit, but it hasn't been "officially struck down" anymore than it was "officially struck down" at previous court levels. It now goes on to the SCOTUS, which can either accept the appeal or reject it. If the appeal is rejected or the appeal is accepted and then the SCOTUS rejects it, only then is it "officially struck down." Nothing like jumping the gun.
Oops, you're right. I got a little excited seeing a judgement passed nullifying the opinion of bigoted asshats. It's still a step in the right direction.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 10:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
It's truly sad that the guy making stupendousman type arguments about gay marriage not contributing to society is winning tonight in three states.
It is very sad indeed. It shows the profound level of ignorance that some people possess, and how easily they are manipulated to rally against something that has no effect on their personal lives.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 11:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
The FLDS lawyers are preparing their amicus curiae for the next round of hearings.
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
You are aware that a slippery slope argument is a fallacy, right?

There's absolutely no reason to think that because gays are permitted to marry that polygamy must also be legal. There is no logical relationship between these two ideas whatsoever.
There's one already in the system
Courthouse News Service
SALT LAKE CITY (CN) - A challenge to Utah's bigamy law made by the stars of television's "Sister Wives" will move forward, a federal judge ruled, but it cannot target the governor or attorney general.
Kody Brown and his so-called sister wives - Meri, Janelle and Christine Brown, and Robyn Sullivan - filed a lawsuit against defendants Gov. Gary Herbert, Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Utah County attorney Jeffrey Buhman in July 2011. The polygamous family claimed that Utah's bigamy law violates the First and 14th Amendments.
45/47
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 11:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
It is very sad indeed. It shows the profound level of ignorance that some people possess, and how easily they are manipulated to rally against something that has no effect on their personal lives.

The dude is second place in the overall delegate count, thanks to three states that are generally not even ultra conservative. ****ing terrifying.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 12:16 PM
 
It's kind of funny how some people pick and choose when to invoke the constitution, yet when they do invoke it claiming it is oh-so-important.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 12:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
It's kind of funny how some people pick and choose when to invoke the constitution, yet when they do invoke it claiming it is oh-so-important.
Start thinking of the Constitution as The Bible of the United States of American and it all starts making sense. A crazy amount of sense.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 12:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
There's one already in the system
Courthouse News Service
So? It still has nothing to do with the slippery slope fallacy. They are two separate issues, and, AFAIK, no one is claiming that one group should be allowed to marry legally if the other does. This is part of the problem with these issues; opponents of one want to grasp at straws and use emotionalism against the other, to make their "point," because they know that they can't win their argument on logic.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 12:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Start thinking of the Constitution as The Bible of the United States of American and it all starts making sense. A crazy amount of sense.
Agreed.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 02:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
So? It still has nothing to do with the slippery slope fallacy. They are two separate issues, and, AFAIK, no one is claiming that one group should be allowed to marry legally if the other does. This is part of the problem with these issues; opponents of one want to grasp at straws and use emotionalism against the other, to make their "point," because they know that they can't win their argument on logic.
I am.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 03:23 PM
 
Yeah I agree.

Furthermore, consider the slippery slope arguments that were made against inter-racial marriage. How were they incorrect? If inter-racial marriage was still outlawed today, the do you think gay marriage would have any chance? I don't. One step at a time is the only way this works, for better or for worse.

To be clear, I certainly don't think they were right morally, and I honestly think that bigamy should be a civil rights issue too, now or in the future, as long as all parties are willing and mentally competent and whatever. But the slippery slope in and of itself seems to be accurate here.

Aside, Chongo I'm honestly confused what your meaning is. Are you for or against the FLDS's actions, whatever they may be here?
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 05:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
I am.
So? It doesn't change the fact that they are separate issues, no matter how much you'd like to intertwine them.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 8, 2012, 05:59 PM
 
Kinda like how women's suffrage and blacks' suffrage were separate issues. Separate, but also kinda... equal
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2012, 01:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
I am.
+1

So much for the "nobody is making that argument" argument.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2012, 02:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
I am.
Are you saying that recognizing gay marriage but not polygamy is inherently unfair? Because that's the real issue. Like I said, there's no logical reason that polygamy MUST be recognized because gay marriage is recognized.

IMO, there is no good reason to deny gay marriage, because it harms no one. Polygamy has terrible social consequences, which is why even societies that traditionally recognized it (like Islam and ancient Judaism) often put an end to the practice. Polygamy rewards the rich and punishes the poor.

We all know you're rich, Shaddim. If you were poor, you wouldn't have two partners. I'm happy you've found your own niche, but your own life circumstances proves to the rest of us exactly why polygamy is socially damaging.

Nothing personal.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2012, 03:06 PM
 
As I've said before, I'm not a huge fan of polygamy in general, but consenting adults trumps that in my book, at least from a philosophical standpoint.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2012, 03:19 PM
 
I really don't have a dog in this race .... but I thought I'd just point out that polygamy is not nearly as uncommon as Western societies would like to believe:

According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of 1,231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry.[3]
Polygamy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In fact, monogamy is far less common. Just saying ....

OAW
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2012, 03:22 PM
 
The polyandry stat is telling, however.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2012, 03:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
The polyandry stat is telling, however.
At the least, I imagine you get less babies than with the other models.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2012, 03:58 PM
 
@Dakar

Indeed. OTOH I think polygynous societies simply have the legal and societal structures in place to acknowledge publicly what so-called monogamous societies very often do privately while pretending not to.

OAW
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:52 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,