City of San Francisco issuing marriage licenses to gays, weds 1 couple so far...

[Asher]

He'll do 2 or 3, given that California isn't a southern state.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Yeah, whatever. I wonder how Arnie is going to handle people violating California law.

He'll probably squeeze someone's milkbags without permission.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
What right?

The right to be equal under the eyes of the law.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by The Templar
He'll probably squeeze someone's milkbags without permission.

See what San Fran has wrought!

Seriously though, it is interesting to see some of the same people deriding that Alabama judge for violating the law support the San Fran city council for doing the same thing.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

bk - your right to live life the way you want to.
you believe that you have a right not to be disgusted and not to have the sacred institution of marriage to be violated. think again, cuz those arnt rights.

[Ben Kenobi]

The right to be equal under the eyes of the law.

Remember we are here in the US...

Why does marriage fall under the provisions of equality? There is no right to be married, beyond that which the state chooses to grant.

And secondly, you are already equal in the eyes of the law, since the law does not prevent anyone from getting married to someone of the opposite sex.

[Ben Kenobi]

If he does nothing, that means that no one has to recognise this marriage outside San Francisco.

[Asher]

And secondly, you are already equal in the eyes of the law, since the law does not prevent anyone from getting married to someone of the opposite sex.

Obviously you are mentally incapable of seeing this rationally, so instead I'll save my time and yours and show you an image of why you're truly upset. Somebody stole your girl.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Seriously though, it is interesting to see some of the same people deriding that Alabama judge for violating the law support the San Fran city council for doing the same thing.

With "Alabama", so you mean the 10 commandments in court?

I, personally, couldn't care less abotu the legislation of your country. I'm more interested in policies, and religious fundamentalism is a policy I strongly oppose. Simple as that.

[Asher]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
See what San Fran has wrought!

Seriously though, it is interesting to see some of the same people deriding that Alabama judge for violating the law support the San Fran city council for doing the same thing.

Why is it interesting that the people who are totally opposed to religions interfering with the rights of others will support both banning religious commandments in courts, and removing the ban to let two consenting adults marry if they happen to be the same sex.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
See what San Fran has wrought!

Seriously though, it is interesting to see some of the same people deriding that Alabama judge for violating the law support the San Fran city council for doing the same thing.

As far as i can tell, no Federal judge has yet to pass a decision telling SF to cut it out, meaning we are nowhere near that point-

and then, of course, there is a fundamental difference between a legislative body passing a law that may not square with laws passed by higher legislatures, and a judge refusing to follow the orders of higher courts.

of course, if you fail to understand the fundamental difference, the explination will have to come much later.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
See what San Fran has wrought!

Seriously though, it is interesting to see some of the same people deriding that Alabama judge for violating the law support the San Fran city council for doing the same thing.

The Alabama judge was violating federal law, then defied a federal judge. Here, the city took their action before being enjoined. Moreover, their action was in violation of a state statute - not a fundamental right. The two cases can be completely distinguished.

[David Floyd]

Why does marriage fall under the provisions of equality? There is no right to be married, beyond that which the state chooses to grant.

Really, so you don't think there is a right to contract freely with others?

[David Floyd]

Moreover, their action was in violation of a state statute - not a fundamental right.

I'd strongly question your definition of "fundamental right".

Speaking of which, what IS your definition?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by GePap
of course, if you fail to understand the fundamental difference, the explination will have to come much later.

I fail to see the fundamental difference unless of course someone can point to me how San Fran is allowed to do this according the CA law.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Seriously though, it is interesting to see some of the same people deriding that Alabama judge for violating the law support the San Fran city council for doing the same thing.

One's right, one's wrong. What's so interesting?

[Az]

Old Lesbians

[Spiffor]

Would you prefer seeing them on GGG?

[Drake Tungsten]

Old Lesbians

Agreed.

to this move by San Francisco, as well. Breaking the law in order to force the issue? There's no surer way of turning the general populace against you...

[ixnay]

IF WE DON'T SEND IN THE NATIONAL GUARD TO SF RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THEY START MARRYING PEOPLE TO THEIR PETS

WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN

ps to the city

[Ben Kenobi]

@ Asher

Why not put Mariah's head, and not Alec Guinness?

[Ben Kenobi]

Why is it interesting that the people who are totally opposed to religions interfering with the rights of others will support both banning religious commandments in courts, and removing the ban to let two consenting adults marry if they happen to be the same sex.

If you recall, I supported the removal of the ten commandments based on the reactions of the Christians.

Remember my argument of idolatry?


Sure lots of strawmen getting kicked over. I bet that makes you feel good.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Now Schwartzenegger has a direct challenge to his authority in San Francisco. It will be interesting to see what action, if any he takes.

He's no conservative so don't even try to manipulate this to fit your own goals. I voted for the guy.

1. Quashing this civil disobedience.
2. Doing nothing
3. Supporting the civil disobedience, and legalising gay marriage across the state.

Civil disobedience? What's wrong with you?

This move is a step towards equal rights that have for a long time have been denied to us GLB people.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

I have given it one more thumbs up than you, so therefore I support it more than you.




Why do you hate gay people, Comrade?

[Drake Tungsten]

You provide no evidence, you provide nothing! And yet you still want to destroy the institution of marriage? You criminal...

[JohnT]

... Laura and I just broke up. Papers will be served tomorrow...

Damn you, gay people! Damn you all! See what you did to my marriage????

[Spiffor]

This is terrible John. I hope you'll get your vengeance on these gay people who have just ruined your marriage

[JohnT]

It's a damned shame...

[Spiffor]

Since these married Lesbians are old, I suggest you to give'em a heart attack on the phone. They had it coming

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
You provide no evidence, you provide nothing! And yet you still want to destroy the institution of marriage? You criminal...

Please leave me alone. I am not the same person I was. I actually think about what I post. I have seen you have not done such a thing.. what a shame really.