Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
It's almost like marriage equality and pot legalization are fundamentally different, incomparable issues and should be handled differently! Oh, Amandarius, you so cray-cray.
Colorado Voters Legalize Marijuana!
|
Colorado Voters Legalize Marijuana!
Cerberus.Eugene said: » Is this you amandarius?  you think having one judge decide these matters is better than the people? which judge? how isn't that tyrnanny lol?
It's easily seen that it's unconstitutional. It is a flagrant exclusion of a group of people based on religious vindications. It is against everything that America stands for, and if America disagrees, it ought just tear up the Constitution now because it was written 200+ years ago, but is eons ahead of us.
Phoenix.Amandarius said: » you think having one judge decide these matters is better than the people? which judge? how isn't that tyrnanny lol? Supreme Court of the United States Then you get the people to change the law if they feel this way. Then it is solid and sound law, not just the opnion of one man/woman.
Cerberus.Pleebo said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » you think having one judge decide these matters is better than the people? which judge? how isn't that tyrnanny lol? Supreme Court of the United States Well you know cases don't start at the Supreme Court? Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Cerberus.Pleebo said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » you think having one judge decide these matters is better than the people? which judge? how isn't that tyrnanny lol? Supreme Court of the United States Well you know cases don't start at the Supreme Court? Well I don't have much to say to people that do not believe in Democracy. We have different world views and will not change each others minds.
The Constitution supersedes Democracy for a very important reason. I'm sorry you find it so easy to wave-off as irrelevant.
Well if a judge finds a law unconstitutional they strike it down. It is not the job of a judge to rewrite a law so you are basically asking a judge to strike down all marriage.
No.
Judges strike down provisions of laws all the time, leaving the rest of the law intact.
Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Well if a judge finds a law unconstitutional they strike it down. It is not the job of a judge to rewrite a law so you are basically asking a judge to strike down all marriage. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Well if a judge finds a law unconstitutional they strike it down. It is not the job of a judge to rewrite a law so you are basically asking a judge to strike down all marriage. Woah woah woah! Different courts do different things. Different judges do different things. The type of Judges I think you're talking about are supposed to apply the law. Very few areas, such as sentencing, are areas in which the Judge can actually use their own discretion. Erring in the application of the law is usually pointed out by an Appellate Court, in which case, the Judge is reversed. Judges aren't perfect and some allow political aspirations to influence their decision making. It's true. None-the-less, please don't walk around with the idea that Judges simply do what they want. That's Hollywood and contributes to a vast misunderstanding of the judicial system. Fenrir.Sylow said: » Judges strike down provisions of laws all the time, leaving the rest of the law intact. You need to be more specific about what kind of judges you're talking about and about what you mean. Are you talking about judges, magistrates, or adjudicators? If you're talking about judicial review, you should already understand the requirements are quite stringent and are not available to all "judges." Just don't believe major issues like this should be decided by one person especially not one that usurps the will of the people. It is not American. It is tyranny.
Why does the will of the people matter when it comes to other people's rights that have no bearing on them whatsoever? Why should you be allowed to decide what your neighbor does in his or her own house as long as they're not hurting anyone?
You still haven't answered that.
Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Just don't believe major issues like this should be decided by one person especially not one that usurps the will of the people. It is not American. It is tyranny. Rest at ease. They are not. If anything, Bureaucracy ensures this. The "tyranny" of not being able to freely marginalize a segment of the population... your life is so hard.
[+]
In case you don't know, Maine and Maryland legalized gay marriage last night in a straight Democratic vote. This is why i mentioned it in this thread.
Again marriage is not a right. It is a legally defined contract. If you do not like the definition in your state get the people to change the law, not a judge. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Just don't believe major issues like this should be decided by one person especially not one that usurps the will of the people. It is not American. It is tyranny. Read my post I supported these being passed Democratically. I said I prefer major issues being passed this way, not by a judge and not by a politician. We are a Republic but major issues like this can be decided on referendums and go straight the tothe people for a vote. Don't have to disagree with me just cos its me. Changing the definition of marriage and legalizing marijuana are huge issues.
So you think that interracial marriage should have been left to the states, too?
Was the Supreme Court being "tyrranical" when it decided Loving v. Virginia? Phoenix.Amandarius said: » In case you don't know, Maine and Maryland legalized gay marriage last night in a straight Democratic vote. This is why i mentioned it in this thread. Again marriage is not a right. It is a legally defined contract. If you do not like the definition in your state get the people to change the law, not a judge. This makes it a matter of federal judges upholding constitutional law, which is like, what they do. And i just confirmed both of those things. And trust me, same sex marriage and marijuana arent a huge issue. Allowing people of the same sex to get a marriage license would not cripple the nation. Allowing someone to smoke marijuana just as you let people smoke tobacco would not cripple the nation. Declaring war on another country,changing the tax code, amending the constitution are major issues.
herp: Pleebo and Sylow responded D: Not even going to pretend to know anything about that case nor do I care to look at it. This is a poorly veiled attempt to now associate me with racism, bigotry. For the record I do not support slavery. I do in fact support what Maine and Maryland passed last night.
All of you please stop discriminating against polygamists, I haven't heard you stand up for their rights. Enuyasha said: » And i just confirmed both of those things. And trust me, same sex marriage and marijuana arent a huge issue. Allowing people of the same sex to get a marriage license would not cripple the nation. Allowing someone to smoke marijuana just as you let people smoke tobacco would not cripple the nation. Declaring war on another country,changing the tax code, amending the constitution are major issues. herp: Pleebo and Sylow responded D: The rage in these posts sure makes it seem like a huge issue to everyone. I beg to differ with you. |
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.