Science > Abortion > Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes.
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
| Date: |
09 Oct 2004 09:04:06 AM |
| Object: |
Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
It's one of the favorite LIES of the dishonest and hateful
RRR cultists/homophobes. They WHINE that same-sex
marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage, while nothing could
be farther from the truth.
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige. And the rights already guaranteed by the
Consitution are sufficient to permit it. Therefore it has ALWAYS
been the right of any same-sex couple ro marry. If that weren't
the case, the loathsome RRR cult wouldn't have been so des-
perate to pass a (now crushed in both houses of Congress,
fortunately) Bigotry Amendment.
Thus we have merely been seeing a growing RECOGNITION
of an already-existing right, as it expands across North America,
and the world. And JUST like interracial marriage, once so
direly feared and whined-about by bigots -- it harms NO one.
And will BENEFIT hundreds of thousands.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
| User: "MAK" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 09:39:05 AM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:4167ebad.121379551@netnews.mchsi.com...
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 10:13:32 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:39:05 GMT,
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time. The ONLY way you hateful and
loathsome bigots could have prevailed was via the Bigotry Amerndment
that just got TROUNCED by **both** houses of Congress.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Forevermore. And there's not a damned thing in the world that loser
like you can do about it.
(Not that it was ANY of your business in the first place if
same-sex couples marriage. There's no way that that would ever
be detrimental to anyone!)
Now go off into a corner and sulk, like the childish and ignorant
bigot that you are. (ROTFL!!!!)
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 10:27:05 AM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:416bfe15.126091733@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:39:05 GMT,
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
And that means same sex marriage will never be Constitutional.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 11:19:44 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:27:05 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time. The ONLY way you hateful and
loathsome bigots could have prevailed was via the Bigotry Amerndment
that just got TROUNCED by **both** houses of Congress.
And that means same sex marriage will never be Constitutional.
ROTFL!!! It already IS Constitutional! You have the reading
comprehension of a GNAT, don't you? Well -- no surprise. A person
has to be dumber than a dead rock just to BE a homphobic bigot like
you. (If you ever happen to grow a brain, maybe you could develop the
common sense to become a fair-minded egalitarian. Right now, you are
exactly the opposite of that. Making the average sewer rat more
useful to society than you are, when it comes to ethics.)
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Forevermore. And there's not a damned thing in the world that loser
like you can do about it.
(Not that it was ANY of your business in the first place if
same-sex couples marriage. There's no way that that would ever
be detrimental to anyone!)
Now go off into a corner and sulk, like the childish and ignorant
bigot that you are. (ROTFL!!!!)
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sneechres" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 05:58:01 PM |
|
|
(GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!) wrote in message news:<416bfe15.126091733@netnews.mchsi.com>...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:39:05 GMT,
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig chilton < > ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is Congress
exercising their power to determine the effects of one state's laws on
another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could use to
strike DOMA down.
Unless, of course, you want to argue that the Constitution itself is
Unconstitutional.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
Not even the 14th Amendment protects homosexuality.
--S
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 06:14:35 PM |
|
|
On 9 Oct 2004 15:58:01 -0700,
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!) wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is Congress
exercising their power to determine the effects of one state's laws on
another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could use to
strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
I think that the Supreme court ultimately will emancipate same-sex
couples JUST as it emancipated women in 1973 with Roe vs. Wade.
And THEN, just as happened with abortion, same-sex marriage will be
universally legal throughout America. The sooner, the better!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 08:52:45 PM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:417a6eb9.154932623@netnews.mchsi.com...
On 9 Oct 2004 15:58:01 -0700,
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!) wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is Congress
exercising their power to determine the effects of one state's laws on
another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could use to
strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court,
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional about DOMA.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 09:34:45 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 01:52:45 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is Congress
exercising their power to determine the effects of one state's laws on
another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
ROTFL!!!! You sound **just** like the hateful losers who
thought -- before Roe vs. Wade -- that abortion could **never** be
universally legalized. They got a BIG (and for all *sensible* people
in our society, very pleasant) surprise. And the sooner you and your
ilk get a SIMILAR surprise in this issue, the happier all *sensible*
people, myself included, will be.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
I think that the Supreme Court ultimately will emancipate same-sex
couples JUST as it emancipated women in 1973 with Roe vs. Wade.
And THEN, just as happened with abortion, same-sex marriage will be
universally legal throughout America. The sooner, the better!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
| User: "MAK" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 09:24:52 AM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> babbled in message
news:41699d27.166819895@netnews.mchsi.com...
the happier all *shrill liberal* nutbags, myself included, will be.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 10:43:32 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 01:52:45 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is Congress
exercising their power to determine the effects of one state's laws on
another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
ROTFL!!!! You sound **just** like the hateful losers who
thought -- before Roe vs. Wade -- that abortion could **never** be
universally legalized. They got a BIG (and for all *sensible* people
in our society, very pleasant) surprise. And the sooner you and your
ilk get a SIMILAR surprise in this issue, the happier all *sensible*
people, myself included, will be.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
I think that the Supreme Court ultimately will emancipate same-sex
couples JUST as it emancipated women in 1973 with Roe vs. Wade.
And THEN, just as happened with abortion, same-sex marriage will be
universally legal throughout America. The sooner, the better!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 11:37:56 AM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:41765858.9513143@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 01:52:45 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is
Congress
exercising their power to determine the effects of one state's laws on
another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 01:39:01 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:37:56 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote...
...NOTHING, in response to the latest post, below.
Maybe he's finally grown enough neurons to realize that
NO FACTS support his anti-human-rights stance (???)
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is
Congress exercising their power to determine the effects of one
state's laws on another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
ROTFL!!!! You sound **just** like the hateful losers who
thought -- before Roe vs. Wade -- that abortion could **never** be
universally legalized. They got a BIG (and for all *sensible* people
in our society, very pleasant) surprise. And the sooner you and your
ilk get a SIMILAR surprise in this issue, the happier all *sensible*
people, myself included, will be.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
I think that the Supreme Court ultimately will emancipate same-sex
couples JUST as it emancipated women in 1973 with Roe vs. Wade.
And THEN, just as happened with abortion, same-sex marriage will be
universally legal throughout America. The sooner, the better!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 04:12:17 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:31:00 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
...STILL said NOTHING, in response to the post below,
to which he supposedly responded.
(ROTFL!!! I'd say he was "losing it." folks, if it just hadn't
been so obvious in his previous posts that he'd already "LOST
it," long ago.)
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is
Congress exercising their power to determine the effects of one
state's laws on another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
ROTFL!!!! You sound **just** like the hateful losers who
thought -- before Roe vs. Wade -- that abortion could **never** be
universally legalized. They got a BIG (and for all *sensible* people
in our society, very pleasant) surprise. And the sooner you and your
ilk get a SIMILAR surprise in this issue, the happier all *sensible*
people, myself included, will be.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
I think that the Supreme Court ultimately will emancipate same-sex
couples JUST as it emancipated women in 1973 with Roe vs. Wade.
And THEN, just as happened with abortion, same-sex marriage will be
universally legal throughout America. The sooner, the better!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 09:46:33 PM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:41699d27.166819895@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 01:52:45 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is
Congress
exercising their power to determine the effects of one state's laws on
another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
No need to, especially since Bush will win the election and get to place
some justices on the bench.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
09 Oct 2004 11:57:03 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 02:46:33 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is
Congress exercising their power to determine the effects of one
state's laws on another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
No need to, especially since Bush will win the election and get
to place some justices on the bench.
THAT would be ALL of America's worst nightmare. No American
alive has ever seen a Supreme Court whose Justices weren't in the
majority consistently on the side of personal liberties. Bush's elec-
tion would open the door wide for an Orwellian society that no Amer-
ican would live long enough to see the end of. The GREATEST
single reason for us to elect KERRY is to **prevent** the chance of
such a horrible debacle ever befalling America. Or at the very least,
to forestall it for several years!
(Of course, an Orwellian society would probably be DELIGHTFUL
to the bone-ignorant, hateful, and control-freakish bigots of the RRR
cult. That would be right up their alley!)
ROTFL!!!! You sound **just** like the hateful losers who
thought -- before Roe vs. Wade -- that abortion could **never** be
universally legalized. They got a BIG (and for all *sensible* people
in our society, very pleasant) surprise. And the sooner you and your
ilk get a SIMILAR surprise in this issue, the happier all *sensible*
people, myself included, will be.
Just like interracial marriage, same-sex marriage is here to STAY.
Apparently not, since very few states show any sign of enacting it.
And the federal government certainly won't, since marriage isn't a
federal issue.
I think that the Supreme Court ultimately will emancipate same-sex
couples JUST as it emancipated women in 1973 with Roe vs. Wade.
And THEN, just as happened with abortion, same-sex marriage will be
universally legal throughout America. The sooner, the better!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 02:06:51 AM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:416abe19.175255313@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 02:46:33 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is
Congress exercising their power to determine the effects of one
state's laws on another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And
the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such
Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
No need to, especially since Bush will win the election and get
to place some justices on the bench.
THAT would be ALL of America's worst nightmare.
Not at all, we need to take back the courts from liberal activists who
legislate from the bench.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matty" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of analready-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 10:07:13 AM |
|
|
Dana wrote:
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:416abe19.175255313@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 02:46:33 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"MAK" <none@invalid.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige.
Which is why a federal DOMA is absolutely necessary to stop it.
LOL!!!!
"Sorry," bigot. (Not really!!) But Constitutional Law TRUMPS
mere statutory law every single time.
No, it doesn't. And especially not in this case. DOMA is
Congress exercising their power to determine the effects of one
state's laws on another as Article 4 section 1 gives them.
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And
the
Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such
Acts,
Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court could
use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line with one
or more of the Constitution's provisions that guarantee individulal
liberties. Then -- good riddance to VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
No need to, especially since Bush will win the election and get
to place some justices on the bench.
THAT would be ALL of America's worst nightmare.
Not at all, we need to take back the courts from liberal activists who
legislate from the bench.
So now you're saying that when a judgement is made, the law should be
interpreted in the spirit in which the legislation was written rather
than taking at face value? if so, if that *is* what you expect, is it
then natural to assume that ones own bias's would interfare with the
decision?
Matty
--
"If a nation could not prosper without the enjoyment of perfect liberty
and perfect justice, there is not in the world a nation which could ever
have prospered." - The Wealth of Nations, Book IV, Chapter IX
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this
world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or
all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form
of government except all those other forms that have been tried from
time to time." - Sir Winston Churchill, Hansard, November 11, 1947
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 10:29:52 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:06:51 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Sneechres" <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is absolutely no law or precedent which the court
could use to strike DOMA down.
We'll see. I predict that it will be tested in the Supreme
Court, and that it will very properly be struck down in line
with one or more of the Constitution's provisions that
guarantee individulal liberties. Then -- good riddance to
VERY bad rubbish.
And the USSC will find that there is nothing Unconstitu-
tional about DOMA.
Dream on!
No need to, especially since Bush will win the election
and get to place some justices on the bench.
THAT would be ALL of America's worst nightmare.
Not at all, we need to take back the courts from liberal
activists who legislate from the bench.
Yeah?
FIRST of all, consider that the only "legislating" from the bench
that ever is done is 100% LEGITIMATE. It's called "Judicial Law,"
and when it's a majority decision that's an interpretation by the U.S.
Supreme Court, it supercedes ALL statutory law, and can be reversed
ONLY by a later reversal BY that court, or by a Constitutional Amend-
ment. So this obvious ABSENCE of a basic knowledge of American
civics on your part is duly and publicly noted. As well as your
obvious GULLIBILITY that's proven by your falling for the dishonest
lies and propaganda of the RRR cult, hook, line and sinker!
It's call the Balance of Powers, and checks-and-balances. That's
in the Constitution. (You might try reading it sometime; you might
actually LEARN something.) It's what keeps the 3 branches of
government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) from overreaching
their power, in each case. (Think "rock, scissors, paper.")
Congress has the power to enact statutory law, and to initiate
Constitutional Amendments. In the case of statutory law, that can
be nullified -- totally LEGALLY -- by the U.S. Supreme Court. But if
the Supreme Court goes too far, then the Constitution can be
amended to override that decision.
ALL Supreme Court Justices are "activists" or they wouldn't BE
there. including the socially-conservative ones. You and your ilk
WHINE because **your** activists happen to be in the minority.
What hypocrisy, and what stupidity!
Americans can than God, their luck stars, or whatever else
anyone may believe in, that the Suprreme Court's majority IS
comprised of social liberals who stand up for our rights!
As I pointed out earlier today in another post ---
If Bush wins this election, American society could devolve into
Orwell's worst nightmare. That is NOT an overstatement. Our per-
sonal liberties and rights have been defended for all of our lives by
a Supreme Court having an egalitarian majority. And that's hanging
by a very fragile thread right now, since many of its decisions have
supported liberty by only a 5-4 majority. It is almost CERTAIN that
at least one, and possibly as many as three, of the Court's Justices
will not be able to hang on for another 4 years if Bush is elected.
Suppose that the majority had voted the OTHER way, just in
THESE decisions, over the last 50 years:
1954 -- The beginning of the end of segregation would
NOT have been initiated.
1967 -- Many states' bans on interracial marriage would
have suvrived, and might still be on the books today.
1973 -- Tens of millions of women who were enabled by a
benificent Supreme Court to put their lives back on
track by having access to safe and legal abortion
would INSTEAD have been **forced** to gestate
unwanted reproductive-process entities to term
against their will, or seek dangerous or exorbitant
illegal abortions, or go to a FREE state for one.
The latter would exclude millions of lower-economic
level women, and it would impose hardship upon
ALL women. We know that even today, 31 years
later, that many states would choose to repress or
prohibit this vital human right, IF they could.
~1998 -- (I'm unsure of the year) -- Legislation passed by
Congress that would have imposed censorship
upon the Internet would have *survived.*
2003 -- The government would NOT have very sensibly
been kicked OUT of the bedrooms of American
citizens.
And those are just some of the KEY cases. A repressive court
obviously would have disregarded our rights just as consistently in
many lesser cases, as well.
If that weren't bad enough, consider this: The liberty-defending
courts (U.S. Supreme Court included, but don't forget such ones
on the state level as Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court, which
sensibly recognized that there is NO valid or Constitutional reason
to deny marriage to same-sex couples) can DIRECTLY stand up
for our rights and nullify attempts to repress them. BUT -- there's
far more to this than that. There's the **psychological** impact
upon legislators as they write their proposed laws with a gimlet
eye on the courts that could (and usually still WOULD) strike
them down in a heartbeat if they didn't work hard to **ensure**
that their legislation doesn't trample on any of our liberties.
The passage of the ban on the SECOND-trimester ID&E abortion
procedure (lyingly called "partial-birth" by is dishonest proponents)
was an exception to that. The Republican majority in both houses of
Congress were under intense pressure by the neocon constituents
that they perceive as being their base, to pass the measure -- again
WITHOUT the exception for the health of the woman that WOULD
have made the act viable. So it's already been invalidated by three
judges, and when it gets to the Supreme Court, it almost surely will
be struck down just as Nebraska's similar law was -- for the SAME
reason,
But MOST of the time, state legislatures and Congress *don't*
swim so obviously against the current -- because thay already know
ahead of time that an egalitarian court stands in the wings ready and
able to scour the Constitution with a fine-tooth comb with the clear
intention of DEFENDING our liberties whenever possible.
WHAT IF -- the Supreme Court no longer were of that mind?
THEN what would the state legislatures and Congress -- so
many of which now are controlled by neocon Republicans who
harbor open and blatant disdain for so many of our rights -- DO?
THINK about that!
And then -- READERS!! -- PLEASE vote for Kerry (and please
NOT for Nader, which would be the equivalent of handing your
vote to Bush) -- and help save America from such an awful and
unthinkable debacle.
Remember --- Supreme Court appointments are for life! And if that
court becomes repressive, very few (if any) Americans alive today will
ever again know a Supreme Court that consistently DEFENDS their
liberties. If there EVER were a time **not** to take freedom for
granted, THIS is that time. More so by far than at any other time in
any o our lifetimes. *Exponentially* more so.
Kerry has promised to appoint egalitarians to the Supreme Court.
And Bush has promised NOT to, almost in as many words.
If we want to REMAIN a free country -- it's up to US. Just a few
days from now!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bard Kesnit" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 09:02:34 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:06:51 GMT, "Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
Not at all, we need to take back the courts from liberal activists who
legislate from the bench.
Why is it when they stopped the FL recount, they were "doing
their jobs the right way." But when they do something you don't agree
with, they are "legislating from the bench?"
Bard Kesnit
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MAK" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 09:29:47 AM |
|
|
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:416abe19.175255313@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 02:46:33 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
And the USSC will find that there is nothing
Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
No need to, especially since Bush will win the election and
get
to place some justices on the bench.
THAT would be ALL of America's worst nightmare.
No, The current President's re-election and all the good that will
flow from that will prove that there really IS a God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of analready-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 02:58:35 PM |
|
|
MAK wrote:
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:416abe19.175255313@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 02:46:33 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
And the USSC will find that there is nothing
Unconstitutional
about DOMA.
Dream on!
No need to, especially since Bush will win the election and
get
to place some justices on the bench.
THAT would be ALL of America's worst nightmare.
No, The current President's re-election and all the good that will
flow from that will prove that there really IS a God.
Well now, that's a really frighting thought.
--
Fritz
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Religion = tyranny.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" of an already-existing right? Yes. |
10 Oct 2004 10:42:44 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 14:29:47 GMT,
"MAK" wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
... Bush will win the election and get to place some justices
on the bench.
THAT would be ALL of America's worst nightmare. No American
alive has ever seen a Supreme Court whose Justices weren't in the
majority consistently on the side of personal liberties. Bush's elec-
tion would open the door wide for an Orwellian society that no Amer-
ican would live long enough to see the end of. The GREATEST
single reason for us to elect KERRY is to **prevent** the chance of
such a horrible debacle ever befalling America. Or at the very least,
to forestall it for several years!
(Of course, an Orwellian society would probably be DELIGHTFUL
to the bone-ignorant, hateful, and control-freakish bigots of the RRR
cult. That would be right up their alley!)
No, The current President's [election] and all the good that will
flow from that will prove that there really IS a God.
No. It would be the diametric OPPOSITE of that! You either are
one ABJECTLY-ignorant person to say that after what I just pointed
out, or your reading comprehension is grievously lacking! Absolutely
NO "good" would flow from such an unspeakable disater for America.
None, whatsoever.
If Bush wins this election, American society could devolve into
Orwell's worst nightmare. That is NOT an overstatement. Our per-
sonal liberties and rights have been defended for all of our lives by
a Supreme Court having an egalitarian majority. And that's hanging
by a very fragile thread right now, since many of its decisions have
supported liberty by only a 5-4 majority. It is almost CERTAIN that
at least one, and possibly as many as three, of the Court's Justices
will not be able to hang on for another 4 years if Bush is elected.
Suppose that the majority had voted the OTHER way, just in
THESE decisions, over the last 50 years:
1954 -- The beginning of the end of segregation would
NOT have been initiated.
1967 -- Many states' bans on interracial marriage would
have suvrived, and might still be on the books today.
1973 -- Tens of millions of women who were enabled by a
benificent Supreme Court to put their lives back on
track by having access to safe and legal abortion
would INSTEAD have been **forced** to gestate
unwanted reproductive-process entities to term
against their will, or seek dangerous or exorbitant
illegal abortions, or go to a FREE state for one.
The latter would exclude millions of lower-economic
level women, and it would impose hardship upon
ALL women. We know that even today, 31 years
later, that many states would choose to repress or
prohibit this vital human right, IF they could.
~1998 -- (I'm unsure of the year) -- Legislation passed by
Congress that would have imposed censorship
upon the Internet would have *survived.*
2003 -- The government would NOT have very sensibly
been kicked OUT of the bedrooms of American
citizens.
And those are just some of the KEY cases. A repressive court
obviously would have disregarded our rights just as consistently in
many lesser cases, as well.
If that weren't bad enough, consider this: The liberty-defending
courts (U.S. Supreme Court included, but don't forget such ones
on the state level as Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court, which
sensibly recognized that there is NO valid or Constitutional reason
to deny marriage to same-sex couples) can DIRECTLY stand up
for our rights and nullify attempts to repress them. BUT -- there's
far more to this than that. There's the **psychological** impact
upon legislators as they write their proposed laws with a gimlet
eye on the courts that could (and usually still WOULD) strike
them down in a heartbeat if they didn't work hard to **ensure**
that their legislation doesn't trample on any of our liberties.
The passage of the ban on the SECOND-trimester ID&E abortion
procedure (lyingly called "partial-birth" by is dishonest proponents)
was an exception to that. The Republican majority in both houses of
Congress were under intense pressure by the neocon constituents
that they perceive as being their base, to pass the measure -- again
WITHOUT the exception for the health of the woman that WOULD
have made the act viable. So it's already been invalidated by three
judges, and when it gets to the Supreme Court, it almost surely will
be struck down just as Nebraska's similar law was -- for the SAME
reason,
But MOST of the time, state legislatures and Congress *don't*
swim so obviously against the current -- because thay already know
ahead of time that an egalitarian court stands in the wings ready and
able to scour the Constitution with a fine-tooth comb with the clear
intention of DEFENDING our liberties whenever possible.
WHAT IF -- the Supreme Court no longer were of that mind?
THEN what would the state legislatures and Congress -- so
many of which now are controlled by neocon Republicans who
harbor open and blatant disdain for so many of our rights -- DO?
THINK about that!
And then -- READERS!! -- PLEASE vote for Kerry (and please
NOT for Nader, which would be the equivalent of handing your
vote to Bush) -- and help save America from such an awful and
unthinkable debacle.
Remember --- Supreme Court appointments are for life! And if that
court becomes repressive, very few (if any) Americans alive today will
ever again know a Supreme Court that consistently DEFENDS their
liberties. If there EVER were a time **not** to take freedom for
granted, THIS is that time. More so by far than at any other time in
any o our lifetimes. *Exponentially* more so.
Kerry has promised to appoint egalitarians to the Supreme Court.
And Bush has promised NOT to, almost in as many words.
If we want to REMAIN a free country -- it's up to US. Just a few
days from now!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...
Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmast | | | | | | | | | | |
