The Observation Deck

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/04/califo ... 1&iref=BN1

How shocking, a liberal judge overturns the voice of the majority. The minority won't be happy until the majority is forced to agree with them...

This won't last long though.

Of the people is gone, it is by the judges... - the people have spoken but the judges don't agree.

Wake up people, radical judges are trying to change the face of America, I can't wait for November, restoring hope in the people.

Um, wasn't the judge nominated by both Reagan AND Bush?

David Lay wrote:Um, wasn't the judge nominated by both Reagan AND Bush?

Yep.

But don't ever let facts get in the way of a socially conservative outburst.

So Ryan, just curious what exactly in his ruling do you feel is contrary to Constitutional law? Have you actually read it?

I mean when conservative legal icon Ted Olsen is lead attorney and a Reagan appointee judge is saying it's unconstitutional, that says something.

And given the trends of the Roberts-led Supreme Court, I wouldn't count on a conservative victory there, either.

All the recent gay-related cases before the conservative-leaning Supreme Court over the last decade have been decided in favor of equal treatment. Given the Constitutional question of the law, I doubt this will be any different.

The defenders of discrimination are the same ones who would have defended laws with garbage excuses that prevented interracial marriage until California and the Supreme Court had to force that change too. Curious if Ryan also feels that was "activist".

BTW, here's a link to the actual ruling:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i//MSNBC/Sect ... rriage.pdf

It doesn't matter who appointed him. Conservatives have nominated some of the most liberal judges. The judge himself is gay, can you say conflict of interest?

Why let facts get in the way.

The majority will never agree on this and it will always be looked as abnormal by the masses. Sorry folks, this lifestyle will never be accepted by the majority no matter how hard you push, even to teach it to 1st graders.

Bryan,

It is insulting to say that people that disagree that your lifestyle is "normal" must have been for keeping inter racial marriages illegal.

Skin color and sexual choice are completely different in most people's eyes.

Not many black people have converted to white but thousands of "gays" convert back and forth. Just look at the "bi" kids that "explore" going back and forth. This is about self esteem and feeling good. Feelings can be deceiving... and then your conscious forces you to justify your choice by trying to make it normal. Look at husbands that cheat on their wives, they try to justify it and hang out with other guys that do the same just so they feel better. Most know that what they are doing isn't right.

Ok, I am done, this should start some fun conversations, the deck has been kind of slow.

Ryan Salo wrote:Skin color and sexual choice are completely different in most people's eyes.

How? In Title VII, The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has interpreted the prohibition of discrimination based on conduct to include discrimination based on sexual orientation.

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

Once again David, we are talking about in the eyes of most people. Just because liberal activists have temporary given in to this agenda doesn't make things OK. Morality is not effected by the changing of laws. When slavery was allowed it was still wrong.

Ryan Salo wrote:Once again David, we are talking about in the eyes of most people. Just because liberal activists have temporary given in to this agenda doesn't make things OK. Morality is not effected by the changing of laws. When slavery was allowed it was still wrong.

Temporary? Executive orders were signed in 1998 that prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation. It's been in force for 12 years now - hardly temporary.

12 years is hardly permanent. Laws have been changed back and forth since our country started. The pendulum swings back and forth.

Ryan when did you choose to be straight? At what age did you decide to choose women over men. Did you try both sexes to see if the decision was correct.

And again I ask you, why do you care? What itches your knickers so much about this? Who decided to make you and the delusional belief system you follow the deciders of my life or anyone else's.

Just as long as you straight people don't make out in front of my children, I don't care what you do. Keep it behind closed doors.

So what is the actual problem with gay marriage? With a 50 percent deviorce rate straight folk aren't knocking it out of the ball park. Perhaps your afraid the gay people will do it better than you?

The majority will never agree on this and it will always be looked as abnormal by the masses.

The majority is old and will someday pass the torch to the young liberals. Gay marriage, pot, Mexicans... everything will be cool soon.

Or do gays getting married somehow diminish the legitimacy and strength of you own marriage? <- you got other problems...

I just dont get what all the ruckus is about.

And why is a judge only a liberal activist when they overturn some wacky right wing attempt to stay relevant?

Jim DeVito wrote:Or do gays getting married somehow diminish the legitimacy and strength of you own marriage?

Exactly. I'm straight, happily married, and I don't see the problem with gay marriage.