1 of 4
1
California Judge Overturns Prop 8
Posted: 04 August 2010 02:27 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3024
Joined  2010-04-26

Link

Fanny bandits rejoice!

 Signature 

“In the end nature is horrific and teaches us nothing.” -Mutual of Omicron

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 August 2010 04:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1805
Joined  2005-07-20

I’m happy that discrimination against a minority group by the tyranny of the majority is overturned.  grin  To the Supreme Court we go, to end the stay against marriage equality!

 Signature 

I saw a happy rainbow recently.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 August 2010 06:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7641
Joined  2008-04-11

Hooray! LOL

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 August 2010 09:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  695
Joined  2007-10-14

`
Waahooooooo!!

You’re coming along, U.S of A :)


`

 Signature 

‘we are so fundamentally constituted of desire that we go on hearing music…...even though we know the band is gone and the stage is silent’

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 August 2010 11:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5166
Joined  2010-06-16

Let’s wait to see what our wonderful Supereme Court does before we rejoice. 

Occam/Emerson
Wordpad

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 August 2010 11:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7641
Joined  2008-04-11
Emerson - 04 August 2010 11:13 PM

Let’s wait to see what our wonderful Supereme Court does before we rejoice. 

Occam/Emerson
Wordpad

Didn’t you mean to write ‘Wonderful’ Supreme Court? I can predict most of the votes, hopefully there is a swing vote i there somewhere, or that they decline to take it (doubtful).

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 06:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4615
Joined  2007-10-05

It would not surprise me one bit if this Supreme Court denied some people full civil rights after declaring corporations are people under the law.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 08:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1805
Joined  2005-07-20

Didn’t ‘cha just LOVE that one…  A corporation, a FICTIONAL entity, merely a legal entity for tax purposes, not a person, not a citizen, not a physical thing, just an idea on paper, owned by a person, the company has an owner, that thing has freedom of speech, that thing that doesn’t even have a mouth or ears!  Bizzaro World, here we come!

[ Edited: 06 August 2010 04:47 PM by jump_in_the_pit ]
 Signature 

I saw a happy rainbow recently.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 10:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1332
Joined  2010-06-07
DarronS - 05 August 2010 06:36 AM

It would not surprise me one bit if this Supreme Court denied some people full civil rights after declaring corporations are people under the law.

Hi DarronS

Assuming I’m an idiot, which your a free to do btw. Why is this a problem?

It seem to just it saying that under the law, a corporation can be dealt with as an individual for the purposes of legal proceedings.

I suppose it might be that there is no actual individual to hold accountable for any mis-doings?

I suspect it’d be almost impossible to find a individual to hold entirely accountable for the actions of a large corporation. Except in cases where an individual steps forward to accept such responsibility, perhaps unjustifiably so, regardless of where any accountability lies.

People like to do that with the President of the US. Hold them accountable for the actions of the US. However the President is only 1/3 of the Government.

It may not be perfect, perhaps unfair, I just don’t see how you’re going to get any better accountability.

A corporation act as an entity which consists of many minds. The whole shares responsibility for it’s action or inaction. You punish an individual for a corporations action then the rest of the responsible individuals get off scott-free.

You can do so to satisfy a personal sense of justice just as a person can blame the actions of the US on one person. However it’s actually no fairer then holding everyone involved accountable.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 10:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4615
Joined  2007-10-05

The problem is the recent Supreme Court decision gives corporations the freedom to buy all the political ads they want, which is the antithesis of “government by the people, of the people, and for the people.” This gives corporations, with their billions of dollars, an unfair advantage to mold public opinion and help elect representatives who will do corporate bidding rather than represent the people. I’ll get back with you later with more. Right now I have to take a shower and get off to my government class.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 10:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5166
Joined  2010-06-16

Well, if the Supreme Court does uphold proposition 8, at least we’ll be assured that same sex corporations won’t be able to marry. 

The whole idea of corporate personhood wasn’t even envisioned by the authors of the constitution.  It didn’t occur until the late 1800s when a Supreme Court clerk wrote it as a note on opinion he wrote for a justice.  Although it’s become accepted, it has no historical basis in fact.

If they weren’t controlled by them, it would be nice if congress could write a law clarifying that corporations are not afforded the capabilities of human U.S. citizens,

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 11:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1332
Joined  2010-06-07
DarronS - 05 August 2010 10:14 AM

The problem is the recent Supreme Court decision gives corporations the freedom to buy all the political ads they want, which is the antithesis of “government by the people, of the people, and for the people.” This gives corporations, with their billions of dollars, an unfair advantage to mold public opinion and help elect representatives who will do corporate bidding rather than represent the people. I’ll get back with you later with more. Right now I have to take a shower and get off to my government class.

Ah… Ok thanks for taking the time to explain.

Actually I wish there was a way to educate people into being skeptical of all advertising.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 04:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  158
Joined  2010-01-03

Parents of lesbians in California are thinking, “Well, we only have to pay for half of the wedding.”

 Signature 

I live in a world of lighthouses. However, my friends are living in sunny tranquility.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 05:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5166
Joined  2010-06-16

The far more rational solution would be to eliminate the term ‘marriage’ from all laws and replace it with ‘civil union’ giving all joined couple the same legal rights.  That way, the government is out of the marriage business, and any pair can apply for a civil union license and go before anyone licensed to join them.  On the other side, churches and any other organization can be licensed to perform marriages, but they would be purely ceremonial.  A pair could get married in a christian or other church, by a humanist celebrant, by an atheist who obtained the license, etc. 

Occam
Wordpad

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 05:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  158
Joined  2010-01-03
Emerson - 05 August 2010 05:14 PM

The far more rational solution would be to eliminate the term ‘marriage’ from all laws and replace it with ‘civil union’ giving all joined couple the same legal rights.  That way, the government is out of the marriage business, and any pair can apply for a civil union license and go before anyone licensed to join them.  On the other side, churches and any other organization can be licensed to perform marriages, but they would be purely ceremonial.  A pair could get married in a christian or other church, by a humanist celebrant, by an atheist who obtained the license, etc. 

Occam
Wordpad

You must described France, but left out the pageantry leading from the ceremony to the mayor’s office.

 Signature 

I live in a world of lighthouses. However, my friends are living in sunny tranquility.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 August 2010 05:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4615
Joined  2007-10-05
Gnostikosis - 05 August 2010 11:58 AM

Actually I wish there was a way to educate people into being skeptical of all advertising.

That would be excellent, but with the cost of a college education these days, even at a community college, it is not likely.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 4
1