Don't move to Californication - Page 3 - XDTalk Forums - Your HS2000/SA-XD Information Source!

Bree · 05-15-2008, 07:50 PM

The ruling of the California Supreme Court represents the PROPER operation of our system of government. The justices are not elected and are not subject to the pressure of public opinion. They are experts in law and the Constitution. They examine the laws passed by the legislature and hold them up to the standard of the Constitution... not the standard of public opinion or referendums.

The public can vote to change the Constitution anytime they wish. All they need is sufficient votes. Until then, the Supreme Court is protecting the rights of citizens who constitute a MINORITY and could never expect to command as many votes as the MAJORITY.

This is the operation of the principle... Majority Rule, Minority Right. It is proper and consistent with the wishes of our founding fathers and the founding fathers of the State of California.

If you disagree with them. Amend the Constitution. But don't criticize them for doing their jobs. That is exactly what they are there to do.

one-eyed-fatman · 05-15-2008, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bree

The ruling of the California Supreme Court represents the PROPER operation of our system of government. The justices are not elected and are not subject to the pressure of public opinion. They are experts in law and the Constitution. They examine the laws passed by the legislature and hold them up to the standard of the Constitution... not the standard of public opinion or referendums.

The public can vote to change the Constitution anytime they wish. All they need is sufficient votes. Until then, the Supreme Court is protecting the rights of citizens who constitute a MINORITY and could never expect to command as many votes as the MAJORITY.

This is the operation of the principle... Majority Rule, Minority Right. It is proper and consistent with the wishes of our founding fathers and the founding fathers of the State of California.

If you disagree with them. Amend the Constitution. But don't criticize them for doing their jobs. That is exactly what they are there to do.

So what your saying is our court system is perfect in every decision they make unless we make an amendment to the constitution? Go blow dude. Money plays a big decision in many court cases. Which lawyers putting money in which judges pockets plays a big part on many decisions made in the court system.

**Pugs** · 05-15-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one-eyed-fatman

So what your saying is our court system is perfect in every decision they make unless we make an amendment to the constitution? Go blow dude. Money plays a big decision in many court cases. Which lawyers putting money in which judges pockets plays a big part on many decisions made in the court system.

She's not a dude, for one. And you clearly are having difficulty reading for content, for another.

cjive134 · 05-15-2008, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bree

The ruling of the California Supreme Court represents the PROPER operation of our system of government. The justices are not elected and are not subject to the pressure of public opinion. They are experts in law and the Constitution. They examine the laws passed by the legislature and hold them up to the standard of the Constitution... not the standard of public opinion or referendums.

The public can vote to change the Constitution anytime they wish. All they need is sufficient votes. Until then, the Supreme Court is protecting the rights of citizens who constitute a MINORITY and could never expect to command as many votes as the MAJORITY.

This is the operation of the principle... Majority Rule, Minority Right. It is proper and consistent with the wishes of our founding fathers and the founding fathers of the State of California.

If you disagree with them. Amend the Constitution. But don't criticize them for doing their jobs. That is exactly what they are there to do.

+1
Bree, I'll bet you got an A+ in civics class. People like to forget that the supreme courts are independant so that they aren't subject to politics.

one-eyed-fatman · 05-15-2008, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjive134

+1
Bree, I'll bet you got an A+ in civics class. People like to forget that the supreme courts are independant so that they aren't subject to politics.

Quote:

Bree, I'll bet you got an A+ in civics class.

Who cares if he did? If he did does that mean he's going to save the world? NO. Does that mean he's going to make a difference in politics? NO. Does it mean he has common sense? NO. It just means if he gets into politics he'll suck butt to get where he wants to go in politics which means he'll take money to get where politics takes him. Same old political crap.

afmo · 05-15-2008, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one-eyed-fatman

Who cares if he did? If he did does that mean he's going to save the world? NO. Does that mean he's going to make a difference in politics? NO. Does it mean he has common sense? NO. It just means if he gets into politics he'll suck butt to get where he wants to go in politics which means he'll take money to get where politics takes him. Same old political crap.

somebody's grumpy that Cali is gonna marry teh gays methinks....

**Frenchy** · 05-15-2008, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by afmo

Its about time they overturned that stupid ban.

Two guys or two girls getting married has NOTHING to do with anyone other than those involved. Denying a state service to one group and not to another based on arbitrary factors is discrimination, plain and simple.

10-4 good buddy.
Live and let live...They are not infringing upon my freedoms.

**Frenchy** · 05-15-2008, 10:45 PM

Fatboy's logic escapes everyone...as usual!

retired · 05-15-2008, 11:03 PM

There was a possible financial issue brought up on another site that I go to discussing this same decision. The thought was, since they will now be able to marry there will be a financial loss to the state (s) and federal govts. because they will be able to take the marriage deduction and perhaps other deductions when filing their taxes.

Also, as was said, businesses may move out of state rather than absorb the expenses involved in providing insurance, benefits, time off to care for a spouse, etc.

Whether or not the above will come true, is something that will be determined as time goes on. And I'm just throwing it out there, not taking a side.

**Frenchy** · 05-15-2008, 11:10 PM

I believe that this would hold true whether it be marriage or civil union.

05-15-2008, 07:50 PM	#21
Bree XDTalk 2K Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Buffalo, NY Posts: 2,615 Blog Entries: 5	The ruling of the California Supreme Court represents the PROPER operation of our system of government. The justices are not elected and are not subject to the pressure of public opinion. They are experts in law and the Constitution. They examine the laws passed by the legislature and hold them up to the standard of the Constitution... not the standard of public opinion or referendums. The public can vote to change the Constitution anytime they wish. All they need is sufficient votes. Until then, the Supreme Court is protecting the rights of citizens who constitute a MINORITY and could never expect to command as many votes as the MAJORITY. This is the operation of the principle... Majority Rule, Minority Right. It is proper and consistent with the wishes of our founding fathers and the founding fathers of the State of California. If you disagree with them. Amend the Constitution. But don't criticize them for doing their jobs. That is exactly what they are there to do. __________________ Shoot Straight and Ride Safe! Bree XD .45 Compact -- Ruger SP-101 .357 Mag. -- Keltec P3AT .380 Rock River Arms 20" Varmint A4 AR-15 w/4-16x56mm MilDot Ruger 10/22 Black Stainless Mossberg 590 Mariner 12 Ga w/Knoxx SpecOps Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide Patriot Guard Rider Iron Butt Association Member The 60's Can't Die As Long As I Won't Leave Them!!

05-15-2008, 10:45 PM	#28
Frenchy XDTalk 10K Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Mid-Missouri Posts: 12,380	Fatboy's logic escapes everyone...as usual! __________________ ~SC Harvey~ 2008 Election..."Imbrace your ignorance, and vote your preference". It's quite simple, really... *If you vote for Obama, you are a fuking idiot. If you vote for McCain, you are a fuking idiot.* *If your vote is for the lessor of two evils, then you can be comforted knowing that you're less of a fuking idiot than the other guy! Because Fritz says so! RON PAUL IN 2008**

05-15-2008, 11:10 PM	#30
Frenchy XDTalk 10K Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Mid-Missouri Posts: 12,380	I believe that this would hold true whether it be marriage or civil union. __________________ ~SC Harvey~ 2008 Election..."Imbrace your ignorance, and vote your preference". It's quite simple, really... *If you vote for Obama, you are a fuking idiot. If you vote for McCain, you are a fuking idiot.* *If your vote is for the lessor of two evils, then you can be comforted knowing that you're less of a fuking idiot than the other guy! Because Fritz says so! RON PAUL IN 2008**

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-15-2008, 11:03 PM	#29
retired XDTalk 5K Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: S. Calif. Posts: 5,232	There was a possible financial issue brought up on another site that I go to discussing this same decision. The thought was, since they will now be able to marry there will be a financial loss to the state (s) and federal govts. because they will be able to take the marriage deduction and perhaps other deductions when filing their taxes. Also, as was said, businesses may move out of state rather than absorb the expenses involved in providing insurance, benefits, time off to care for a spouse, etc. Whether or not the above will come true, is something that will be determined as time goes on. And I'm just throwing it out there, not taking a side.