Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

UltimoDragonQuest posted:

It's just not done much. Congressmen will send amicus briefs but generally Justice defends federal laws.

Is the Justice Department going to defend DOMA? Dammit, Obama. :argh:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

quote:

Congress (BLAG) is defending the law because Justice will not.
Justice was at the hearing to argue for heightened scrutiny.

"Heightened scrutiny?" What's that mean, are they gunning for DOMA?

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

UltimoDragonQuest posted:

Justice is opposed to DOMA and not defending it. The Republican Congress is defending it with the lawyer who just argued against the healthcare mandate in SCOTUS.

Explanation of heightened scrutiny.
We're winning regardless of heightened scrutiny so this is a just a fun legal lesson. :eng101:

Ah, alright then. We can add that to the (small but slowly growing) pile of "good poo poo Obama's done."

Though I've heard before that the only thing stopping national gay marriage in the US is the fundies being really good at keeping the issue away from the SCOTUS. Is the Supreme Court really, firmly on the side of not being stupid this time around, or could it go unexpectedly (and poorly)? I mean, this is the court that passed Citizens United; I don't consider them the high-water mark of progressive rulings, really.

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

quote:

This seems out of context... it says in the article that all democrats voted for civil unions, and this guy is democrat. What's he trying to say, that he never had any moral qualms about DADT because...?

It seems like he's doing this as some form of atonement. As in, "back in the day I persecuted gays for a living, and it was simply normal. The banality of evil firsthand. But today I realize that that was in fact awful, and so I'm here with my vote to make things right."

Or at least, I'd like to hope it's that interpretation.

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer
:golfclap:

I don't care if it's for politics or not, he's still backing the right opinion, so yay Obama.

Besides, it's not as if he didn't already back it de facto anyhow. Now we just finally made the guy come out and say it openly. :toot:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer
Oh gently caress no. Seriously? That's total bullshit!

Oh gently caress you, Republicans. gently caress you, gently caress you, gently caress you, ar;auhfg;ofh!

:argh:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

The Oldest Man posted:

The hippies of the sixties (baby boomers born in the late 40s and early 50s) are not the same generation as people born in the sixties who turned out in droves for Reagan.

Yeah, but they're the same people today who think LGBT folk are subhuman.

Hippies didn't gently caress like rabbits and do drugs all day while burning their draft cards because they gave a drat about feminism, civil liberties, or pacifism, they did it because they were selfish fucks who grew up in an entitlement culture of prosperity built on the absurd amount of money the US made off World War II. They happened to be on the right side of things when it came to the Vietnam War, but ultimately they were just pricks, and the way they're loving things up today reflects that.

The hippie generation is almost the literal personification of FYGM, I swear.

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

quote:

...decentralization provides the greater protection of civil rights.

Ok, well, please go to Somalia and enjoy your increased protection of your civil rights and leave the sane people here the gently caress alone.

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

Amused to Death posted:

No, I want him to stay because I want him to back up that assertion. We have 230 years of history as a nation to draw on.

Well, sure, and I think the stupidity of his arguments is amusing, but he's making GBS threads up the thread and it's annoying.

Edit:

quote:

By the way, the Civil War was NOT fought over slavery.

Oh my God you loving idiot. :suicide:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

quote:

There is plenty more where that came from. I have mountains of evidence to support my claims and I know Civil War history very well. From what I gather, it doesn't seem you have even broached the subject in an even cursory manner.

"I have mountains of papers by my favorite Rand-obsessed Libertarian hacks, and you obviously know nothing."

:getout:

Edit:

\/\/\/ Wow.

You know what, I'll just cut everything out of this post except this one part. He's not worth taking up the rest of the space for.

Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 06:35 on Dec 2, 2012

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

quote:

"‘Gay Panic’ Defense Results in Mistrial for Teen Who Killed Classmate
Prosecutors are scrambling to arrange another trial for a teenager who shot and killed a gay classmate after the first ended in a mistrial.

Seventeen-year-old Brandon McInerney, then 14, shot 15-year-old Larry King twice in the head in the middle of class. According to a friend’s testimony, McInerney decided to bring a gun to school after King regaled in him the hallway with, “What’s up, baby?” He pulled the trigger shortly after hearing that King was considering changing his name to Latisha.

Jurors had no doubt that McInerney killed King.

What they could not determine was the degree of the offense — was it manslaughter or homicide? The disagreement stems from the defense’s argument that McInerney was responding to persistent advances from King.

Defense lawyers argued that King had embarrassed McInerney repeatedly with sexual advances, painting a picture of McInerney as an intelligent young man abused by his family and harassed at school. They also brought in classmates and teachers to testify that King’s effeminate behavior and dress was distracting to other students."

Holy poo poo, I thought they got rid of gay panic defense. D:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

Amused to Death posted:

He was eventually plead guilty as they were gearing up for a 2nd trial and got 21 years, though they dropped the hate crime enhancement.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/11/brandon-mcinerney-school-criticized-by-both-sides-in-gay-teen-slaying-case.html

Ok, well at last that story didn't end with the "and he got away with it too" I thought it would.

quote:

Depends on where in the country you're trying to argue it

Ugh why America? :eng99:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

CheesyDog posted:

Oh woweee I'll just go write myself some tax credits right now...

"Well gawrsh what's wrong with that? Then we can defund the government non-violently and create Galt's gulch a utopia! :downs:"

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

Glitterbomber posted:

Alright, Lysander Spooner was an insane anarchist who's main beef with Lincoln was that his lovely mail company was 'forced' out of business by the federal mail system, and he fully supported the confederacy seceding because of 'consent to be governed'. He legitimately believed the rights of some racists in power trumped the rights of the people within, and that Davis was totally a swell guy for bravely standing up for his right to refuse to be governed, while plunging his people into poverty and war.

He was also a violent abolitionist of the stripe of 'you negroes should go revolt more, that doesn't end horribly for the black population, right? I'll hang here and write another essay...'

I think he was also super mad that college students had a reduced legal internship because, you know, they had an actual education behind them.

So yea, Spooner, great dude.

drat, beaten to the punch. :golfclap:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

Amused to Death posted:

jrodefeld, noted supporter of being able to buy and sell children.

"The invisible hand will make sure all children - what? We tried that in Britain and some guy named Dickens bitched us out for it? Nonsense! I'm sure it'll work itself out; these things always do."

Edit: \/\/\/ I love when that happens. Good on you.

Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 08:11 on Dec 2, 2012

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

zachol posted:

I'm probably a horrible person but this post was hilarious.

I'm pretty sure the other people were named for characters in Atlas Shrugged. And yes, that was brilliant. :golfclap:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

Brave New World posted:

Unfortunately, they won't flail around as impotently as we would hope. This will be a moment when certain extreme-right elements would perceive themselves as being truly cornered in an "alien" culture. I would expect to see things like states such as Alabama and Mississippi calling for secession, and not in the quaint little online petition way that they have been here post-election.

I'm game for Civil War 2.0. A bunch of fat old hicks against the modern US Military and reliant on Federal support? They'd fold in a month and we could do Reconstruction properly this time. :getin:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

hangedman1984 posted:

I live (unfortunately) in Georgia, I really don't want civil war 2.0

If I actually thought the Southern conservative leadership was that unhinged I wouldn't be joking, believe me. :ohdear:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer
I've been trying to convince my mom that gay people are cool, yo, and she was totally blown away by these guys. Thanks, thread. :)

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

UltimoDragonQuest posted:

Illinois legislature will probably vote on a marriage bill in January.

I guess the Democrats outside of Chicago could revolt but majorities of 40-19 and 71-47 are pretty good and the Governor is on board.

I don't know if there is a law or general policy for delaying laws, but the 2011 civil union law was signed January 12th and went into effect on June 1st.

Hell yes! Maybe then Wisconsin will feel pressure too due to it's southern neighbor--

Right, Republican government. :suicide:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

Timby posted:

Wisconsin banned marriage equality through a constitutional amendment, too.

loving Hell, Wisconsin. Why do you suck so much now? :negative:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

LeftistMuslimObama posted:

Now? Wisconsin did that like 6 years ago.

When I say "now," I mean relative to how we were kinda awesome back in the early 20th Century.

I guess I shouldn't be shocked that we went down the rabbit hole of Reagan with the rest of the country, but still. :v:

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer
Let's say Indiana passes this ban but the Supreme Court goes for broke and completely legalizes gay marriage nationwide. What can Indiana and other states that banned gay marriage do to make life difficult for gay couples trying to get married there or get their out-of-state marriages recognized, and what could we do to fight that?

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

All Of The Dicks posted:

Well, they could pass a law so that you have to have a transvaginal unltrasound before you marry a man.

Also, you have to watch a video of a couple going to bed after being married for 10 years. To be educated about the risks.

I think the transvaginal ultrasound would make more (twisted, reactionary) sense for lesbian couples than gay couples, no?

...

It's terrifying that I can see that kind of thing totally being done in the south. :suicide:

quote:

The flip side of the tenth amendment is that anything that the supreme court decides is enumerated by the constitution supersedes anything in state law, even state constitutions. So they could waste their money fighting gay marriages only to have their lawsuits struck down the second they reach a judge I guess.

I understand the legal side of it, I think. I mean the practical side.

For example, say the Supreme Court says gay marriage is legal in all of America. What happens if the south just says, "lol nope" and refuses to issue gay marriage licenses or recognize out-of-state gay marriages?

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer

LeftistMuslimObama posted:

We've always been a mixed bag. Maybe we spit out Fightin' Bob, but we also inflicted McCarthy on the world.

Touché. :negative:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lightning Knight
Feb 24, 2012

Pray for Answer
Um, hi guys. Kind stopped being politically active for awhile. Out of curiosity though, has there been any movement for (or against) gay rights/marriage in Wisconsin? I figure since it's an election year things might be happening, and now that I'm a dirty liberal college student (who can actually vote this time around :v: ) I might get to do things, if anybody is making waves.

I mean, we elected a gay Senator, I'd be shocked if there was nothing going on. :shobon:

  • Locked thread