Prop 8 for gay marriage in Calif

[75center]

Don't think of it that way. You'll find judges recuse themselves for a lot of reasons, especially if a conflict of interest is present, but not for this. Instead of gay marriage, imagine this is a free speech case. In any free speech case, a judge will invariably expand or restrict laws that apply to him as well.

 

That makes sense although in this case it was a specific set of circumstances that would tend to favor certain citizens, the judge being one of them. In a free speech case there is no pool of judges to select from who are not affected. It seems that it should have been disclosed and perhaps another judge not so situated be selected.

[jericho]

More reason of why our votes dont count.

 

if we are allowed to burn our flags, protest our dead soldiers, allow the kkk to march (all of which I disagree with) then there is guaranteed free speech. Unless of course you are speaking for chritians issues I am sure.

 

what is obsene to one is not obsene to another (hooters) (big Johnson) pot leafs

[SportsGuy41017]

More reason of why our votes dont count.

 

if we are allowed to burn our flags, protest our dead soldiers, allow the kkk to march (all of which I disagree with) then there is guaranteed free speech. Unless of course you are speaking for chritians issues I am sure.

 

what is obsene to one is not obsene to another (hooters) (big Johnson) pot leafs

WHAT?

[Clyde]

At first blush I can see MT Ref's concern. However, as others have pointed out there can be many, many cases where there is a perceived conflict. Gays would argue that a heterosexual judge ruling on a homosexual issue is a conflict. Some would argue that an African-American judge ruling on a civil rights case is a conflict. You can go on and on. The real issue revolves around the law itself. If it's an egregious ruling there are remedies. I'm sure that someone in CA is seeking a remedy as we read this.

 

I do not agree that the voters vote should always be law. We're not the most intelligent bunch and sometimes bad laws make it on a ballot.

[jericho]

WHAT?

 

I believe a t-shirt with a pot leaf on it is obsene, I believe a t-shirt of marilyn manson claiming anything is obsene, but it is allowed.

[woodsrider]

My point is a judge over ruled what the voters voted in. Voters in calif voted agaisnt gay marriage and all of a sudden a GAY judge comes in a rules it unfair. I dont see straight judges all of a sudden come in a rule agaisnt a gay right.

 

What if CA were to put on the ballot that blacks couldn't vote and it passed? Should it not be overturned as unfair? My point is not everything should be put on a ballot and voted on. Who are you or 51% of the population to tell anyone who they can and can't marry. I think the judge made the right decision here, gay or straight.

[UKMustangFan]

Would you feel the same way if it had been voted into law and a straight judge overturned it outlawing gay marriage?

 

Still waiting....

[jericho]

Well then why put the stupid thing on the ballot anyway to let people vote if it dont matter anyway.

 

Why is Obama the President, because he got more votes, does that matter, why dont a judge go over rule that and say no, since our votes dont matter.

 

Should Obama be President if he won by 1 vote, you mean that all of those close to 51 % say he can be President

[acemona]

Well then why put the stupid thing on the ballot anyway to let people vote if it dont matter anyway.

 

Why is Obama the President, because he got more votes, does that matter, why dont a judge go over rule that and say no, since our votes dont matter.

 

Should Obama be President if he won by 1 vote, you mean that all of those close to 51 % say he can be President

 

Al Gore got more votes in 2000 and the supreme court overturned it.

[jericho]

Al Gore got more votes in 2000 and the supreme court overturned it.

 

I know and that is not fair either, it just goes to show our votes do not count.

 

Dont put something on the ballot if voters dont get to decide the outcome.

[Getslow]

I know and that is not fair either, it just goes to show our votes do not count.

 

Dont put something on the ballot if voters dont get to decide the outcome.

 

The system in California for getting such propositions on the ballot does not contemplate constitutional outcomes. I'm pretty certain that all you need is a certain number of supporters to sign and you'll get it on the ballot.

[jericho]

Still waiting....

 

It dont matter, the voters voted for it. If our votes count then any judge should not be able to just come in and say that isnt right. Is 1 mans opinion mean more that the thousands of voters.

 

anytime a vote is overturned I do not think it is right, shouldnt the majority speak. Why vote now.

[woodsrider]

It dont matter, the voters voted for it. If our votes count then any judge should not be able to just come in and say that isnt right. Is 1 mans opinion mean more that the thousands of voters.

 

anytime a vote is overturned I do not think it is right, shouldnt the majority speak. Why vote now.

 

So if I get a proposition on the ballot make it illegal for blacks to vote and it passes that would be ok with you? Don't you think a judge should stike that down?

[jericho]

So if I get a proposition on the ballot make it illegal for blacks to vote and it passes that would be ok with you? Don't you think a judge should stike that down?

 

I can make up stuff too to show my side too.

[RomanEmpire]

So much for Lincoln's speech at the Gettysburg Address................"and that Government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."