Vote on Iowa justice seen as test for gay marriage

Oct 8, 2012 Full story: WFAA-TV Dallas 39

Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins isn't well known outside the legal community of his state, but whether he should keep his job has become one of the most fiercely contested judicial issues on the Nov.

Read more
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“IT'S TIME TO ELIMINATE”

Since: Mar 11

PROP 8 AND DOMA!!!

#30 Oct 9, 2012
Jedi Mind_Tricker wrote:
<quoted text>Agreed, marriage equality is one man and one woman marrying, and all having the equal right to do that. As for Prop 8 being law, see Supreme Court.
Why doc.......SCOTUS isn't going to hear the appeal from the proponents of Prop 8!!!

“IT'S TIME TO ELIMINATE”

Since: Mar 11

PROP 8 AND DOMA!!!

#31 Oct 9, 2012
Jedi Mind_Tricker wrote:
Judge Scalia has sent you the message, that not only will SCOTUS take the case, but the constitution is definite and same sex marriage is not provided for and he explained to all why and what to do.
Sorry doc, but just because Justice Scalia has stated HIS personal opinion on the issue, doesn't mean SCOTUS will take the appeal.......it just means that one Justice has stated his opinion on this issue and if SCOTUS should decide to hear the appeal, should recuse himself for already having a predetermined biased on the issue!!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#32 Oct 9, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's the same argument everywhere else as well......Civil Unions are fine, but they really aren't!!!
The good thing is the New Jersey Supreme Court already ruled same-sex couples must have the same rights/benefits as opposite-sex couples, which is how we got civil unions there.

Once DOMA is overturned, it should be a slam dunk for full marriage rights in NJ. The only way the state can comply with the previous court's order will be to issue marriage licenses.

The court case (Garden State Equality v Dow) should make it to the NJ Supreme Court shortly after the SCOTUS rules on DOMA next year.

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#33 Oct 9, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why doc.......SCOTUS isn't going to hear the appeal from the proponents of Prop 8!!!
We don't know that yet and probably will not know for certain until next Monday.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#34 Oct 9, 2012
Jedi Mind_Tricker wrote:
<quoted text>Here is the thing, most gays know that same sex marriage is wrong. However, many of you don't see it that way, because you suspend logic and reason. So, you expected with certainty that Prop 8 would never become law, but it did and it is.
Judge Scalia has sent you the message, that not only will SCOTUS take the case, but the constitution is definite and same sex marriage is not provided for and he explained to all why and what to do. The reason we got the 13 and 14 amendment for example, was because they needed to be added to the constitution so as to extend it.
Well, as Scalia said and I have said, if you want same sex marriage get 38 states to agree and hold a convention to add an amendment to the constitution. Gays are always trying to make a faux comparison to blacks, but then youact like they are inferior and you are better, so you do not need to travel the same trail for rights that they had to pave. They showed you how to do it, so if your cause if just, it is not, then do it. Until then, you are not even respected for your effortless attempts. The Internet and few 1000 gays who soon became a 100 then 10 marching after Prop 8, for a few weeks. It cost more than that, so it appears it is not even worth it to you.
Take some good advise, pack your bags and to home or for the long haul.
Nope, if the SCOTUS was going to take the Prop 8 case then they would have done so at the Sep 24th conference when it was on the docket.

They will wait until after the election to officially reject the anti-gay's petition, and then same-sex couples will be able to marry in California once again.

But keep hoping Scalia is gonna save you.......

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#35 Oct 9, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry doc, but just because Justice Scalia has stated HIS personal opinion on the issue, doesn't mean SCOTUS will take the appeal.......it just means that one Justice has stated his opinion on this issue and if SCOTUS should decide to hear the appeal, should recuse himself for already having a predetermined biased on the issue!!!
Exactly. Scalia must now recuse himself from any future marriage cases which reach the court, as well as abortion & death penalty cases.

He really tipped his hand there and clearly stated he has already pre-judged any such cases.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#36 Oct 9, 2012
TucksunJack wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't know that yet and probably will not know for certain until next Monday.
More likely we won't know until the Monday after the election.

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#37 Oct 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
More likely we won't know until the Monday after the election.
I don't see why he election has anything to do with it.

“IT'S TIME TO ELIMINATE”

Since: Mar 11

PROP 8 AND DOMA!!!

#38 Oct 9, 2012
TucksunJack wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't know that yet and probably will not know for certain until next Monday.
They aren't going to hear the Prop 8 appeal......SCOTUS doesn't want to truly touch this issue in the first place and the 9th gave them a free pass on it!!!

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#39 Oct 9, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
They aren't going to hear the Prop 8 appeal......SCOTUS doesn't want to truly touch this issue in the first place and the 9th gave them a free pass on it!!!
I agree with your statement here, but we will not know for CERTAIN until probably next Monday.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#40 Oct 9, 2012
TucksunJack wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't see why he election has anything to do with it.
They're playing politics with it as usual.

If they weren't waiting for after the election, then there was no reason not to put their decision out the first week.

They're playing politics. Same reason they haven't announced on the DOMA case either.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#41 Oct 10, 2012
Junior Esquire wrote:
<quoted text>
The word "equality" as used by the gays in reference to marriage is a misnomer.
Take for example "Mens" and "Ladies" public restrooms. Logical people do not scream that "seperate is not equal". The reason for seperate facilities is so intuitively obvious that codification into law is superfluous.
The only way that a Mens room and a Ladies room could be unequal would be if perhaps the Mens room had toilets and the Ladies room only had holes in the floor. If that were the case, the women would be screaming for toilets, not for the right to use the Mens room.
If the gays want to equate the inequality in marriage benefits to toilets, I say give them their toilets, but don't try to redefine restrooms.
And I have never been in a public Mens restroom and heard a man protest about the absence of a bidet.
Oh Lord not the restroom story again.

Have you never been on an airplane or bus?

Have you ever seen a "mens" or "ladies" sign on a 747?

Seriously when you start to compare marriage with bathrooms you've shown just how weak all your other "reasons" to oppose SSM really are.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#42 Oct 10, 2012
Junior Esquire wrote:
<quoted text>
The word "equality" as used by the gays in reference to marriage is a misnomer.
Take for example "Mens" and "Ladies" public restrooms. Logical people do not scream that "seperate is not equal". The reason for seperate facilities is so intuitively obvious that codification into law is superfluous.
The only way that a Mens room and a Ladies room could be unequal would be if perhaps the Mens room had toilets and the Ladies room only had holes in the floor. If that were the case, the women would be screaming for toilets, not for the right to use the Mens room.
If the gays want to equate the inequality in marriage benefits to toilets, I say give them their toilets, but don't try to redefine restrooms.
And I have never been in a public Mens restroom and heard a man protest about the absence of a bidet.
The topic is about electing judges. But you want to discuss restrooms.

You're one weird dude.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#43 Oct 10, 2012
Junior Esquire wrote:
<quoted text>
Evidently you did not read or could not comprehend my post.
In my post I referred to those "state & federal rights/benefits" as "toilets", and advocated giving gays the same "toilets", but separate "restrooms". Meaning, you can have the benefits, just find a different name for your "marriage".
Make sense now?
If not, let me try another example-
When I was young, my father asked my brother and I if we would help him rake the yard, for a dollar for each of us. When the job was done, he paid my brother with a dollar bill and me with four quarters.
Neither of us complained, because we understood that the purchasing power of each was equal.
If you gays were to be granted the same marriage benefits as the straights, but insisted on using the word "marriage", you would be acting petty, like someone who would not accept four quarters instead of a dollar bill, rediculously demanding exactness instead of accepting equivilence.
No dear our ereading comprehension is fine.

We're discussing the pros and cons of elected judges and you want to talk about bathrooms. What's next? Toe tapping?

Freud would have a field day with your case history.

You little pervert.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#44 Oct 10, 2012
Junior Esquire wrote:
<quoted text>

If you gays were to be granted the same marriage benefits as the straights, but insisted on using the word "marriage", you would be acting petty, like someone who would not accept four quarters instead of a dollar bill, rediculously demanding exactness instead of accepting equivilence.
I think it's your reading comprehension you should worry about.

MARRIAGE for same sex couples exists in 6 States now and the District of Columbia.

Civil unions exist in several others.

You are insisting we call our marriages something they aren't.

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#45 Oct 10, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Oh Lord not the restroom story again.
Have you never been on an airplane or bus?
Have you ever seen a "mens" or "ladies" sign on a 747?
Seriously when you start to compare marriage with bathrooms you've shown just how weak all your other "reasons" to oppose SSM really are.
In The City Of New York, the LAW is that any person can use any bathroom no matter how they are dressed, and no matter how the bathroooms are marked. That is the LAW.

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#46 Oct 10, 2012
I remember when this happened and find it rather amusing.

:)

See what happens when you ASSUME ?!

http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php...

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#47 Oct 10, 2012

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#48 Oct 10, 2012
To FaFoxy.

If you and Junior want to play in the bathroom together fine, but leave the rest of us out of it if you don't mind.

We're trying to discuss the hypocrisy evident in the anti gay groups in relation to firing someone over their political beliefs.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 23 min piratefighting 1,742
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 34 min Thinking 14,508
News Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 1 hr Brian_G 1,924
News Pediatrician Won't Treat Baby With Lesbian Moms 1 hr Brian_G 778
News Indiana lawmakers try to quiet firestorm surrou... 1 hr NorCal Native 42
News The Hoosier Nuremberg Laws 1 hr Cordwainer Trout 39
News Many 'Straight' Men Have Gay Sex (Sep '06) 2 hr Ap0c0lypse2015 4,389
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 3 hr Blackburn 30,913
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 5 hr Frankie Rizzo 17,819
News Gay marriage (Mar '13) 6 hr Mr_SKY 58,894
More from around the web