Active Users:561 Time:02/03/2026 09:20:12 AM
Nah, it was way above page 109, in the findings of fact somewhere. Legolas Send a noteboard - 05/08/2010 12:37:48 PM
I read from p109 to the bottom but didn't notice any mention of Scalia by name. Did I miss it, or did the judge simply name the case and you happen to know that the quote was from Scalia?

Page 61, quoting from Scalia's dissent in the famous Lawrence v. Texas case (Supreme Court decision overruling Texas' ban on "sodomy" ):

"“If moral disapprobation of homosexual
conduct is ‘no legitimate state interest’ for purposes of
proscribing that conduct * * * what justification could
there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to
homosexual couples exercising ‘the liberty protected by
the Constitution’? Surely not the encouragement of
procreation, since the sterile and the elderly are
allowed to marry.”
This message last edited by Legolas on 05/08/2010 at 12:37:59 PM
Reply to message
Judge rules California's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional - 04/08/2010 10:40:50 PM 1497 Views
Thank God. *NM* - 04/08/2010 10:52:30 PM 426 Views
Amen. *NM* - 05/08/2010 02:09:24 AM 484 Views
Good news, but as the article says, it'll go all the way to the SC. - 04/08/2010 10:55:58 PM 812 Views
So then is that how we do it? - 04/08/2010 11:01:19 PM 952 Views
Of course. - 04/08/2010 11:04:59 PM 843 Views
His point was - 04/08/2010 11:40:14 PM 993 Views
Yeah but: What Ghavrel said below *NM* - 05/08/2010 08:01:02 AM 475 Views
And again... - 05/08/2010 06:08:56 PM 715 Views
well that is sort of the idea of how democracy works - 04/08/2010 11:06:57 PM 835 Views
I'm not the one who came up with the referendum system, you do realize. - 04/08/2010 11:11:13 PM 833 Views
The referendum system, in my opinion, has been a failure, especially in CA. - 04/08/2010 11:46:21 PM 926 Views
democracy has been a failure in CA. - 05/08/2010 02:42:21 PM 701 Views
No. It just shows the problems of a crazy electorate. - 05/08/2010 03:29:21 PM 849 Views
I think you made my point *NM* - 05/08/2010 03:35:00 PM 443 Views
About Californians being crazy, yes. *NM* - 05/08/2010 04:53:32 PM 411 Views
we vote fro way to much crap in general - 05/08/2010 02:41:19 PM 792 Views
Yeah, I agree. - 05/08/2010 04:11:34 PM 777 Views
my one recent dealing with our criminal justice - 05/08/2010 04:25:30 PM 800 Views
There are certain things that should not be decided by a vote... - 05/08/2010 02:02:45 AM 863 Views
I do agree with you on that. Hell yes, and on a subject like this in particular. - 05/08/2010 02:17:24 AM 887 Views
Re: I do agree with you on that. Hell yes, and on a subject like this in particular. - 05/08/2010 10:46:54 AM 870 Views
I understand it. - 05/08/2010 03:06:40 PM 866 Views
I know you don't support proposition 8 - 05/08/2010 03:29:34 PM 873 Views
- 05/08/2010 03:34:01 PM 886 Views
But that is just simplistic and silly to complain about when it is a long standing possibility - 05/08/2010 03:46:59 PM 774 Views
Oh, ees it? - 05/08/2010 04:07:39 PM 900 Views
Well they knew the rules before they started the whole thing - 05/08/2010 04:12:33 PM 779 Views
Why would you complain if you won? - 05/08/2010 04:15:20 PM 847 Views
You could recognise that you won by the system working in a way you don't like? - 05/08/2010 04:23:58 PM 726 Views
I'm sure that happens, in general. - 06/08/2010 02:43:18 PM 724 Views
It seems to happen a lot nowadays - 06/08/2010 03:06:33 PM 742 Views
instead it should be decided by judges who answer to no one? *NM* - 05/08/2010 07:12:59 AM 426 Views
The same judges who upheld our private right to bear arms. - 05/08/2010 02:09:07 PM 867 Views
not when judges stop using the Constitution - 05/08/2010 02:30:51 PM 846 Views
Sexual preference is not the right being protected. - 05/08/2010 03:22:04 PM 903 Views
I know that the 14th amendment is routinely used in ways it was never intended. - 05/08/2010 05:25:07 PM 815 Views
I realize that, but it is ultimately a good thing. - 05/08/2010 05:31:19 PM 891 Views
I am really on the fence a bit on the whole issue - 05/08/2010 06:00:59 PM 864 Views
I generally agree with you. - 05/08/2010 06:33:56 PM 844 Views
let's take away the citizenship of all black people if that's the way you think - 05/08/2010 09:06:23 PM 758 Views
Come now lets not be stupid - 06/08/2010 05:31:18 PM 711 Views
sorry but your statement was completely ignorant. - 06/08/2010 07:27:09 PM 833 Views
I will talk as soon as you stop spouting stupid rhetoric and say something relevant - 06/08/2010 07:54:09 PM 801 Views
bullshit. you will personally attack me no matter what i say. - 07/08/2010 02:04:04 PM 848 Views
Let's just be clear about which amendment is which. - 05/08/2010 11:50:57 PM 757 Views
but that still ignores intent and expands the law in ways not intnented when it created - 06/08/2010 04:53:43 AM 774 Views
Yes, no, no, and no. - 06/08/2010 05:29:09 AM 827 Views
there are serious flaws in your thinking here - 06/08/2010 06:18:13 PM 894 Views
Your assertions continue to lack support. - 06/08/2010 07:23:17 PM 921 Views
not all you just refuse to see things you disagree with - 06/08/2010 08:36:32 PM 882 Views
...said the pot to the kettle - 06/08/2010 09:17:28 PM 961 Views
yes but a shiny stainless steel pot - 09/08/2010 11:21:33 PM 1009 Views
You continue to be wrong about history and the role of courts. - 10/08/2010 01:05:39 AM 1359 Views
If he's wrong, a lot of law scholars and Supreme Court Justices are wrong. - 10/08/2010 01:44:05 AM 804 Views
Brown vs. Board of Education, 'nuff said. *NM* - 10/08/2010 04:32:37 AM 424 Views
part oif the problem appears to be you completely missing the point - 10/08/2010 01:23:19 PM 1006 Views
let my simplify my argument - 10/08/2010 01:42:47 PM 736 Views
Since when is marriage a right? *NM* - 05/08/2010 04:11:16 PM 409 Views
it may not be a "right"... - 05/08/2010 04:22:44 PM 745 Views
This is where the debate comes into play.... - 05/08/2010 05:04:08 PM 771 Views
How much would it change the debate if it was nurture, really? - 05/08/2010 09:48:22 PM 812 Views
except this is not merely a matter of changing society - 05/08/2010 11:18:48 PM 841 Views
1948. *NM* - 05/08/2010 04:50:30 PM 418 Views
It's a benefit that is being extended selectively to one set of the populace. - 05/08/2010 04:52:52 PM 830 Views
Hey, I'm single.... - 05/08/2010 05:05:41 PM 757 Views
That's a specious argument and you know it. - 05/08/2010 05:13:17 PM 815 Views
A homosexual has every opportunity as well..... - 05/08/2010 05:23:56 PM 768 Views
Oh quit the bullshit already. - 05/08/2010 05:29:15 PM 1008 Views
Slow your role... - 05/08/2010 09:08:54 PM 882 Views
Your religious beliefs have 100% to do with your position. - 05/08/2010 09:43:23 PM 905 Views
Sorry, but what a nonsense. - 05/08/2010 09:27:17 PM 755 Views
hey that's it, jens! you solved the WHOLE PROBLEM!!! - 05/08/2010 11:24:29 PM 873 Views
ON TO WORLD HUNGER! - 06/08/2010 07:59:51 AM 761 Views
LET THEM HAVE CAEK. *NM* - 06/08/2010 02:29:56 PM 393 Views
Are you sure it's wise to feed people on a lie? *NM* - 06/08/2010 02:34:26 PM 486 Views
People are fed lies all the time - 06/08/2010 09:30:37 PM 745 Views
I agree with you - 05/08/2010 05:06:40 PM 802 Views
That's not valid. - 05/08/2010 05:26:50 PM 804 Views
I invite you to read the judge's conclusions, linked again inside. - 05/08/2010 11:43:44 PM 853 Views
Since 1948 - 06/08/2010 04:01:02 AM 987 Views
gah. can. only. see. typo. *NM* - 06/08/2010 03:43:21 PM 390 Views
I don't see any typo... *NM* - 06/08/2010 04:07:18 PM 448 Views
Open the link. *NM* - 06/08/2010 04:47:04 PM 543 Views
Oh, right. Yeah, that does kinda detract from things. *NM* - 06/08/2010 04:48:47 PM 421 Views
I agree - 05/08/2010 07:22:17 AM 814 Views
And Civil Rights lost the Democrats the South. - 05/08/2010 03:44:56 PM 828 Views
but it was done by congress passing laws and the president signing those laws - 05/08/2010 04:20:19 PM 771 Views
uhm, what? - 05/08/2010 04:24:43 PM 766 Views
those were mostly rulings up holding laws not stiking them down - 05/08/2010 05:05:15 PM 857 Views
I was under the impression that the supreme court had a role in it - 05/08/2010 04:31:51 PM 768 Views
but the court was not over turning the laws passed by congress - 05/08/2010 05:11:06 PM 840 Views
No, like in this case, isn't it? - 05/08/2010 05:24:19 PM 743 Views
I would say that is another case of judicial activism and shows the danger of the practice - 05/08/2010 05:43:02 PM 733 Views
Which one is? I imagine from different view points both are. - 06/08/2010 10:34:11 AM 725 Views
The law wasn't constitutional. - 07/08/2010 06:17:04 AM 758 Views
well it will take a higher court to decide that - 09/08/2010 10:46:15 PM 788 Views
Hard to believe it's the same governor who said "Gay marriage should be between a man and a woman." *NM* - 04/08/2010 11:05:45 PM 497 Views
Or "Iff it bleeds we can kill itt!" *NM* - 04/08/2010 11:14:45 PM 476 Views
Another step in the right direction. *NM* - 04/08/2010 11:08:15 PM 500 Views
Link to the full court order inside: - 04/08/2010 11:43:29 PM 972 Views
The judge quoting Scalia in favour of gay marriage is fairly amusing. - 04/08/2010 11:50:47 PM 820 Views
What page was that on? - 05/08/2010 11:25:49 AM 735 Views
Nah, it was way above page 109, in the findings of fact somewhere. - 05/08/2010 12:37:48 PM 850 Views
Oh, that is brilliant. - 05/08/2010 01:12:21 PM 758 Views
Pretty much. - 05/08/2010 01:44:22 PM 880 Views
I've always wondered what basis there is for banning necrophilia if "it's disgusting" is invalid. - 05/08/2010 01:51:19 PM 830 Views
because you cannot give consent when you are dead? - 05/08/2010 03:04:46 PM 834 Views
what if you give consent while you are still alive? - 05/08/2010 03:21:59 PM 911 Views
Is it then illegal? - 05/08/2010 03:23:46 PM 822 Views
I would think it would be illegal even then - 05/08/2010 03:34:31 PM 845 Views
Wikipedia to the rescue! - 05/08/2010 04:20:15 PM 994 Views
A dead body is just an object, not a person with rights. - 05/08/2010 03:27:08 PM 831 Views
Yes, but - 06/08/2010 08:42:05 AM 781 Views
Absolutely not. - 06/08/2010 03:21:14 PM 835 Views
not to mention necrophilia has a large potential to be hazardous to health. - 06/08/2010 09:42:43 PM 926 Views
That was a very well written judgement. - 05/08/2010 11:24:38 AM 839 Views
- 05/08/2010 12:10:02 AM 832 Views
Totally agree. - 05/08/2010 01:01:42 PM 877 Views
+1 *NM* - 05/08/2010 03:42:08 PM 439 Views
Irrelevant decision.....this was heading to SCOTUS from day 1 *NM* - 05/08/2010 12:53:26 AM 452 Views

Reply to Message