Active Users:197 Time:02/06/2024 09:07:11 AM
Quite so, but I don't think it's commonly a mainstay of their diet *NM* Floffe Send a noteboard - 06/08/2010 09:50:33 PM
--- signature starts here ---

I am the Demon of Delightfulness and Sinister Smirkings!

e^(πi)+1=0
identity named after the Terry Pratchett of 18th century mathematics
Reply to message
Judge rules California's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional - 04/08/2010 10:40:50 PM 1331 Views
Thank God. *NM* - 04/08/2010 10:52:30 PM 371 Views
Amen. *NM* - 05/08/2010 02:09:24 AM 425 Views
Good news, but as the article says, it'll go all the way to the SC. - 04/08/2010 10:55:58 PM 689 Views
So then is that how we do it? - 04/08/2010 11:01:19 PM 812 Views
Of course. - 04/08/2010 11:04:59 PM 723 Views
His point was - 04/08/2010 11:40:14 PM 868 Views
Yeah but: What Ghavrel said below *NM* - 05/08/2010 08:01:02 AM 422 Views
And again... - 05/08/2010 06:08:56 PM 563 Views
well that is sort of the idea of how democracy works - 04/08/2010 11:06:57 PM 703 Views
I'm not the one who came up with the referendum system, you do realize. - 04/08/2010 11:11:13 PM 715 Views
The referendum system, in my opinion, has been a failure, especially in CA. - 04/08/2010 11:46:21 PM 790 Views
democracy has been a failure in CA. - 05/08/2010 02:42:21 PM 584 Views
No. It just shows the problems of a crazy electorate. - 05/08/2010 03:29:21 PM 695 Views
I think you made my point *NM* - 05/08/2010 03:35:00 PM 390 Views
About Californians being crazy, yes. *NM* - 05/08/2010 04:53:32 PM 365 Views
we vote fro way to much crap in general - 05/08/2010 02:41:19 PM 646 Views
Yeah, I agree. - 05/08/2010 04:11:34 PM 636 Views
my one recent dealing with our criminal justice - 05/08/2010 04:25:30 PM 675 Views
There are certain things that should not be decided by a vote... - 05/08/2010 02:02:45 AM 709 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 764 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 755 Views
I understand it. - 05/08/2010 03:06:40 PM 740 Views
I know you don't support proposition 8 - 05/08/2010 03:29:34 PM 725 Views
- 05/08/2010 03:34:01 PM 764 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 646 Views
Oh, ees it? - 05/08/2010 04:07:39 PM 786 Views
Well they knew the rules before they started the whole thing - 05/08/2010 04:12:33 PM 625 Views
Why would you complain if you won? - 05/08/2010 04:15:20 PM 706 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 597 Views
I'm sure that happens, in general. - 06/08/2010 02:43:18 PM 585 Views
It seems to happen a lot nowadays - 06/08/2010 03:06:33 PM 617 Views
instead it should be decided by judges who answer to no one? *NM* - 05/08/2010 07:12:59 AM 379 Views
The same judges who upheld our private right to bear arms. - 05/08/2010 02:09:07 PM 739 Views
not when judges stop using the Constitution - 05/08/2010 02:30:51 PM 717 Views
Sexual preference is not the right being protected. - 05/08/2010 03:22:04 PM 788 Views
I know that the 14th amendment is routinely used in ways it was never intended. - 05/08/2010 05:25:07 PM 696 Views
I realize that, but it is ultimately a good thing. - 05/08/2010 05:31:19 PM 767 Views
I am really on the fence a bit on the whole issue - 05/08/2010 06:00:59 PM 707 Views
I generally agree with you. - 05/08/2010 06:33:56 PM 726 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 625 Views
Come now lets not be stupid - 06/08/2010 05:31:18 PM 595 Views
sorry but your statement was completely ignorant. - 06/08/2010 07:27:09 PM 711 Views
I will talk as soon as you stop spouting stupid rhetoric and say something relevant - 06/08/2010 07:54:09 PM 672 Views
bullshit. you will personally attack me no matter what i say. - 07/08/2010 02:04:04 PM 719 Views
Let's just be clear about which amendment is which. - 05/08/2010 11:50:57 PM 594 Views
but that still ignores intent and expands the law in ways not intnented when it created - 06/08/2010 04:53:43 AM 654 Views
Yes, no, no, and no. - 06/08/2010 05:29:09 AM 687 Views
there are serious flaws in your thinking here - 06/08/2010 06:18:13 PM 760 Views
Your assertions continue to lack support. - 06/08/2010 07:23:17 PM 794 Views
not all you just refuse to see things you disagree with - 06/08/2010 08:36:32 PM 757 Views
...said the pot to the kettle - 06/08/2010 09:17:28 PM 835 Views
yes but a shiny stainless steel pot - 09/08/2010 11:21:33 PM 873 Views
You continue to be wrong about history and the role of courts. - 10/08/2010 01:05:39 AM 1219 Views
If he's wrong, a lot of law scholars and Supreme Court Justices are wrong. - 10/08/2010 01:44:05 AM 683 Views
Brown vs. Board of Education, 'nuff said. *NM* - 10/08/2010 04:32:37 AM 376 Views
part oif the problem appears to be you completely missing the point - 10/08/2010 01:23:19 PM 893 Views
let my simplify my argument - 10/08/2010 01:42:47 PM 596 Views
Since when is marriage a right? *NM* - 05/08/2010 04:11:16 PM 363 Views
it may not be a "right"... - 05/08/2010 04:22:44 PM 628 Views
This is where the debate comes into play.... - 05/08/2010 05:04:08 PM 643 Views
How much would it change the debate if it was nurture, really? - 05/08/2010 09:48:22 PM 663 Views
except this is not merely a matter of changing society - 05/08/2010 11:18:48 PM 705 Views
1948. *NM* - 05/08/2010 04:50:30 PM 362 Views
It's a benefit that is being extended selectively to one set of the populace. - 05/08/2010 04:52:52 PM 702 Views
Hey, I'm single.... - 05/08/2010 05:05:41 PM 622 Views
That's a specious argument and you know it. - 05/08/2010 05:13:17 PM 693 Views
A homosexual has every opportunity as well..... - 05/08/2010 05:23:56 PM 644 Views
Oh quit the bullshit already. - 05/08/2010 05:29:15 PM 844 Views
Slow your role... - 05/08/2010 09:08:54 PM 746 Views
Your religious beliefs have 100% to do with your position. - 05/08/2010 09:43:23 PM 791 Views
Sorry, but what a nonsense. - 05/08/2010 09:27:17 PM 611 Views
hey that's it, jens! you solved the WHOLE PROBLEM!!! - 05/08/2010 11:24:29 PM 738 Views
ON TO WORLD HUNGER! - 06/08/2010 07:59:51 AM 618 Views
LET THEM HAVE CAEK. *NM* - 06/08/2010 02:29:56 PM 348 Views
Are you sure it's wise to feed people on a lie? *NM* - 06/08/2010 02:34:26 PM 435 Views
People are fed lies all the time - 06/08/2010 09:30:37 PM 619 Views
Quite so, but I don't think it's commonly a mainstay of their diet *NM* - 06/08/2010 09:50:33 PM 377 Views
I agree with you - 05/08/2010 05:06:40 PM 678 Views
That's not valid. - 05/08/2010 05:26:50 PM 692 Views
I invite you to read the judge's conclusions, linked again inside. - 05/08/2010 11:43:44 PM 730 Views
Since 1948 - 06/08/2010 04:01:02 AM 815 Views
gah. can. only. see. typo. *NM* - 06/08/2010 03:43:21 PM 334 Views
I don't see any typo... *NM* - 06/08/2010 04:07:18 PM 391 Views
Open the link. *NM* - 06/08/2010 04:47:04 PM 483 Views
Oh, right. Yeah, that does kinda detract from things. *NM* - 06/08/2010 04:48:47 PM 371 Views
I agree - 05/08/2010 07:22:17 AM 705 Views
And Civil Rights lost the Democrats the South. - 05/08/2010 03:44:56 PM 711 Views
but it was done by congress passing laws and the president signing those laws - 05/08/2010 04:20:19 PM 663 Views
uhm, what? - 05/08/2010 04:24:43 PM 654 Views
those were mostly rulings up holding laws not stiking them down - 05/08/2010 05:05:15 PM 718 Views
I was under the impression that the supreme court had a role in it - 05/08/2010 04:31:51 PM 619 Views
but the court was not over turning the laws passed by congress - 05/08/2010 05:11:06 PM 681 Views
No, like in this case, isn't it? - 05/08/2010 05:24:19 PM 631 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 597 Views
Which one is? I imagine from different view points both are. - 06/08/2010 10:34:11 AM 603 Views
The law wasn't constitutional. - 07/08/2010 06:17:04 AM 638 Views
well it will take a higher court to decide that - 09/08/2010 10:46:15 PM 667 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 450 Views
Or "Iff it bleeds we can kill itt!" *NM* - 04/08/2010 11:14:45 PM 424 Views
Another step in the right direction. *NM* - 04/08/2010 11:08:15 PM 443 Views
Link to the full court order inside: - 04/08/2010 11:43:29 PM 817 Views
The judge quoting Scalia in favour of gay marriage is fairly amusing. - 04/08/2010 11:50:47 PM 700 Views
What page was that on? - 05/08/2010 11:25:49 AM 618 Views
Nah, it was way above page 109, in the findings of fact somewhere. - 05/08/2010 12:37:48 PM 718 Views
Oh, that is brilliant. - 05/08/2010 01:12:21 PM 624 Views
Pretty much. - 05/08/2010 01:44:22 PM 752 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 695 Views
because you cannot give consent when you are dead? - 05/08/2010 03:04:46 PM 687 Views
what if you give consent while you are still alive? - 05/08/2010 03:21:59 PM 785 Views
Is it then illegal? - 05/08/2010 03:23:46 PM 709 Views
I would think it would be illegal even then - 05/08/2010 03:34:31 PM 720 Views
Wikipedia to the rescue! - 05/08/2010 04:20:15 PM 847 Views
A dead body is just an object, not a person with rights. - 05/08/2010 03:27:08 PM 709 Views
Yes, but - 06/08/2010 08:42:05 AM 665 Views
Absolutely not. - 06/08/2010 03:21:14 PM 715 Views
not to mention necrophilia has a large potential to be hazardous to health. - 06/08/2010 09:42:43 PM 759 Views
That was a very well written judgement. - 05/08/2010 11:24:38 AM 714 Views
- 05/08/2010 12:10:02 AM 711 Views
Totally agree. - 05/08/2010 01:01:42 PM 756 Views
+1 *NM* - 05/08/2010 03:42:08 PM 391 Views
Irrelevant decision.....this was heading to SCOTUS from day 1 *NM* - 05/08/2010 12:53:26 AM 404 Views

Reply to Message