If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Prop. 8 supporters: "Justice Kennedy, that apple looks so delicious and red, can we have another bite?" Justice Kennedy: Nyoop   (talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 93
    More: Fail, Justice Kennedy, same-sex marriages, motions  
•       •       •

4767 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Jun 2013 at 6:49 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



93 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-30 06:43:15 PM
Why not Scalia? Wouldn't he be your best bet?
 
2013-06-30 06:53:17 PM

EvilEgg: Why not Scalia? Wouldn't he be your best bet?


Kennedy hears appeals from the 9th circuit.
 
2013-06-30 06:53:45 PM
Proposition 8 supporters could continue their efforts to halt gay marriage by filing their request with another Supreme Court justice.

img4.imageshack.us

How you doin'?
 
2013-06-30 06:58:09 PM
"And I'm Anthony Kennedy. Go fark yourself, San Diego."
 
2013-06-30 07:01:01 PM
The group's name? The "Alliance Defending Freedom". I shiat you not.  Defending your freedom not to get gay married since 1994!
 
2013-06-30 07:01:39 PM

EvilEgg: Why not Scalia? Wouldn't he be your best bet?


Also, Scalia very much does not want to hear the case. They dismissed the suit for lack of standing, rather than just rule against prop 8, because they wanted to leave it a state issue.
 
2013-06-30 07:13:04 PM
So I guess dragging gay men behind a pickup truck until they're dead is out of the question,.
 
2013-06-30 07:13:23 PM
I suspect appealing to a more sympathetic justice like Scalia would be a fruitless gesture.  Once the SCOTUS rules on a matter, it is probably an unwritten policy that they don't listen to appeals like this.  It would make the institution look weak, and even Scalia wouldn't want that.
 
2013-06-30 07:14:21 PM
Well everyone knows that once gay marriage is legal, it's also mandatory. It's like the elephant in the room that the gay agenda doesn't like to talk about.

/the elephant they're probably going to gay-marry that is.
 
2013-06-30 07:16:21 PM

EvilEgg: Why not Scalia? Wouldn't he be your best bet?


Scalia was one of the majority in that case - it was Roberts, Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan who were the majority.  Kennedy wrote the dissent, along with Alito, Thomas, and Sotomayor.

They didn't judge Prop 8 on its merits - they ruled the petitioners had no standing to challenge the district court ruling because they had failed to demonstrate any personal harm.  In doing so, they allowed the district court's ruling to stand (which was that Prop 8 was unconstitutional).
 
2013-06-30 07:17:00 PM

fusillade762: The group's name? The "Alliance Defending Freedom". I shiat you not.  Defending your freedom not to get gay married since 1994!


My last comment was meant to include this quote. Damn phone posting....
 
2013-06-30 07:17:33 PM

fusillade762: The group's name? The "Alliance Defending Freedom". I shiat you not.  Defending your freedom not to get gay married since 1994!


At this point I think they're choosing their names deliberately like that.
 
2013-06-30 07:20:03 PM
Not yours haters, cannot haz.

See also: Pony.

/Prop H8ers gonna Prop H8.
 
2013-06-30 07:26:59 PM

Snapper Carr: Proposition 8 supporters could continue their efforts to halt gay marriage by filing their request with another Supreme Court justice.

[img4.imageshack.us image 220x275]

How you doin'?


img4.imageshack.uschinahistorypodcast.com

Separated at birth?
 
2013-06-30 07:27:06 PM

maddermaxx: Well everyone knows that once gay marriage is legal, it's also mandatory. It's like the elephant in the room that the gay agenda doesn't like to talk about.

/the elephant they're probably going to gay-marry that is.


This is what Republicans actually believe,
 
2013-06-30 07:36:47 PM
That train has left the station.

On the same page: Singer Jennifer Lopez Under Fire For Performing For Turkmenistan President

Pop star Jennifer Lopez has come under fire for performing Saturday night for the 56th birthday of Turkmenistan President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov.


That's where those Prop 8ers need to take their fight: to Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov

And if any of them are killed or maimed when their spell checker explodes, who really cares?
 
2013-06-30 07:38:17 PM
YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.
 
2013-06-30 07:48:28 PM

Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.


And in other news, the House just proposed the 42nd bill to repeal Obamacare.
 
2013-06-30 07:51:56 PM

LockeOak: EvilEgg: Why not Scalia? Wouldn't he be your best bet?

Kennedy hears appeals from the 9th circuit.


It would be a major breach of judicial protocol for another Justice try to overturn another Justice's ruling. In fact I don't think the article is correct on their assertion that another Justice could issue a stay after Kennedy dismissed it. He's the Chief Justice of the 9th Circuit, so I don't think anyone has the authority to overrule him on this.
 
2013-06-30 07:52:11 PM
Well folks, you tried. You passed a law, it was found wanting, and now you've used up your appeal. Our democracy at work.

How does all that freedom taste? I hope it tastes as good as a hazelnut and vanilla wedding cake, because I see a lot more of that in California's future. Here's to all the wedding planners, all the resorts and hotels, and all the cater waiters who will be riding higher in the saddle as all that freedom trickles down into hard currency injected deep into your economy. Bands will playing, dresses and suits will be bought or rented, and halls will be booked. You are about to taste the freedom that Massachusetts has had now for some time, and while it might feel to some like they've gotten something sticky and messy all up in their faces after all that effort, but in the end, you're going to simply have to be soothed by the economic payload that is about to drop into your laps.
 
2013-06-30 07:54:54 PM

gimmegimme: Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.

And in other news, the House just proposed the 42nd bill to repeal Obamacare.


Laser like focus on jobs.
 
2013-06-30 07:57:06 PM

Sum Dum Gai: EvilEgg: Why not Scalia? Wouldn't he be your best bet?

Scalia was one of the majority in that case - it was Roberts, Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan who were the majority.  Kennedy wrote the dissent, along with Alito, Thomas, and Sotomayor.

They didn't judge Prop 8 on its merits - they ruled the petitioners had no standing to challenge the district court ruling because they had failed to demonstrate any personal harm.  In doing so, they allowed the district court's ruling to stand (which was that Prop 8 was unconstitutional).


Yeah, it was an extremely narrow ruling based on procedural grounds, so I don't see much there to overturn it on.

/GED in law
 
2013-06-30 08:01:20 PM

Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.


We've been telling that to the South for a century and a half. How you think that is going?
 
2013-06-30 08:08:46 PM

OtherLittleGuy: Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.

We've been telling that to the South for a century and a half. How you think that is going?


Alas, nobody's taken that decision before the Supreme Court yet...
 
2013-06-30 08:11:11 PM
Let it go, you farking hateful bastards.
 
2013-06-30 08:20:09 PM

OtherLittleGuy: Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.

We've been telling that to the South for a century and a half. How you think that is going?


Well, we freed the slaves, integrated the schools, and now there's a black president.

It's going.
 
2013-06-30 08:31:29 PM

Kumana Wanalaia: OtherLittleGuy: Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.

We've been telling that to the South for a century and a half. How you think that is going?

Well, we freed the slaves,

<--forced to do so by the Northern States

 integrated the schools,<--forced to do so by the Northern States

 and now there's a black president.<--voted into office by the Northern States (well except Va, iirc)

It'sit was going until the SC neutered the voting rights act.

ftfy.
 
2013-06-30 08:36:59 PM

Lurking Fear: Kumana Wanalaia: OtherLittleGuy: Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.

We've been telling that to the South for a century and a half. How you think that is going?

Well, we freed the slaves,<--forced to do so by the Northern States

 integrated the schools,<--forced to do so by the Northern States

 and now there's a black president.<--voted into office by the Northern States (well except Va, iirc)

It'sit was going until the SC neutered the voting rights act.

ftfy.


Ugh.  And then people like you get all huffy about people like Paula Deen who wanted to give African Americans JOBS!  (Playing the roles of slaves at a plantation-themed party intended to remind the white people how awesome it was when slavery was legal.)
 
2013-06-30 08:38:49 PM

ZoeNekros: EvilEgg: Why not Scalia? Wouldn't he be your best bet?

Also, Scalia very much does not want to hear the case. They dismissed the suit for lack of standing, rather than just rule against prop 8, because they wanted to leave it a state issue.


Sort of. Roberts hinted that a state would have trouble as well.
 
2013-06-30 08:39:11 PM
Sum Dum Gai: They didn't judge Prop 8 on its merits - they ruled the petitioners had no standing to challenge the district court ruling because they had failed to demonstrate any personal harm.

I think that part of the story hasn't gotten enough attention. They were unable to show that this law harmed them, despite their gnashing of teeth and rending of garments about how this will destroy everything.
 
2013-06-30 08:40:53 PM

Phins: Sum Dum Gai: They didn't judge Prop 8 on its merits - they ruled the petitioners had no standing to challenge the district court ruling because they had failed to demonstrate any personal harm.

I think that part of the story hasn't gotten enough attention. They were unable to show that this law harmed them, despite their gnashing of teeth and rending of garments about how this will destroy everything.


www.bitlogic.com
 
2013-06-30 08:42:23 PM
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-06-30 08:43:38 PM

Phins: Sum Dum Gai: They didn't judge Prop 8 on its merits - they ruled the petitioners had no standing to challenge the district court ruling because they had failed to demonstrate any personal harm.

I think that part of the story hasn't gotten enough attention. They were unable to show that this law harmed them, despite their gnashing of teeth and rending of garments about how this will destroy everything.


Yep, the law is funny that way.

Prop 8 Proponents: But it will destroy everything!!!
Court: Then come back when it does. Till then, STFU.
 
2013-06-30 08:49:44 PM

fusillade762: The group's name? The "Alliance Defending Freedom". I shiat you not.  Defending your freedom not to get gay married since 1994!


Their dumbass lead lawyer on the marriage stuff, Austin Nimocks, came to my law school and debated one of the con law professors about marriage equality. Aside from the fact that you could tell it was greatly taxing him to have to treat an openly gay debate opponent with respect, and that he's a massive bigot, he's also an idiot as far as the law goes. I almost felt bad for him, his arguments were so moronic that he got totally pwned.

It warms my heart to see him get the pimp slap from Kennedy on this one.
 
2013-06-30 08:50:11 PM

Lurking Fear: Kumana Wanalaia: OtherLittleGuy: Gyrfalcon: YOU LOST. GIVE THE F*CK UP.

We've been telling that to the South for a century and a half. How you think that is going?

Well, we freed the slaves,<--forced to do so by the Northern States

 integrated the schools,<--forced to do so by the Northern States

 and now there's a black president.<--voted into office by the Northern States (well except Va, iirc)

It'sit was going until the SC neutered the voting rights act.

ftfy.


Whole lotta this.
 
2013-06-30 08:50:23 PM

hubiestubert: hazelnut


Heh, nuts.
 
2013-06-30 08:57:52 PM

Phins: Sum Dum Gai: They didn't judge Prop 8 on its merits - they ruled the petitioners had no standing to challenge the district court ruling because they had failed to demonstrate any personal harm.

I think that part of the story hasn't gotten enough attention. They were unable to show that this law harmed them, despite their gnashing of teeth and rending of garments about how this will destroy everything.


"Oh noes. People who don't belong to my church, nor live in my neighborhood will get married. However shall I explain to my children that not everyone believes as we do? How can I face my wife if other people share our wedded bliss, albeit in a civil ceremony which already happens, or in other churches, which likewise happens? The homos will book wedding chapels that I or my friends have already used, and thus I know their value, and to me, that will degrade them, or they will refuse to book homo weddings, which will mean that they will not benefit from the largess of gay community. However shall I come to grips with the fading of my power to mock the homos?"

In truth, it's not exactly the most compelling of legal arguments...
 
2013-06-30 09:01:32 PM
maddermaxx: Well everyone knows that once gay marriage is legal, it's also mandatory. It's like the elephant in the room that the gay agenda doesn't like to talk about.

Is there an FAQ for this somewhere? I have so many Qs.

Is my heterosexual marriage automatically dissolved or do I have to file for divorce? Who will pay for my divorce costs? Will another woman be assigned to me for marriage or must I find my own? Must I marry a woman who was a lesbian before the ruling or can I marry just any woman? Can I wear the same dress I wore when I married my husband or is that bad luck? Can I still live with my now-husband or would that be sinful since we're no longer married?
 
2013-06-30 09:14:19 PM
The way so many bigots react, I really wonder if the true reason behind opposing the legalization of gay marriage is that they're actually going to have to stand up for their "beliefs" when a gay couple asks to get married in their church and then their little preacher will have to grow the balls to say "no" and deal with the consequences on an individual basis.  Hey, jackholes, if your "faith" is strong enough that you think it should be the law for everyone, then your "faith" is strong enough to have to deal with the consequences of being a bigot without the government patting you on the head and saying what a good boy you are.  Deal with it, equality's coming, and there's nowhere for you bigots to hide.
 
2013-06-30 09:21:13 PM
Talk about sore losers. I'd respect conservatives more if their positions weren't the most assholish positions possible.
 
2013-06-30 09:39:54 PM

hubiestubert: Well folks, you tried. You passed a law, it was found wanting, and now you've used up your appeal. Our democracy at work.

How does all that freedom taste? I hope it tastes as good as a hazelnut and vanilla wedding cake, because I see a lot more of that in California's future. Here's to all the wedding planners, all the resorts and hotels, and all the cater waiters who will be riding higher in the saddle as all that freedom trickles down into hard currency injected deep into your economy. Bands will playing, dresses and suits will be bought or rented, and halls will be booked. You are about to taste the freedom that Massachusetts has had now for some time, and while it might feel to some like they've gotten something sticky and messy all up in their faces after all that effort, but in the end, you're going to simply have to be soothed by the economic payload that is about to drop into your laps.


You left out divorce attorneys.  More marriages makes more work for us!!
 
2013-06-30 09:49:00 PM

fusillade762: The group's name? The "Alliance Defending Freedom". I shiat you not.  Defending your freedom not to get gay married since 1994!


I now call to order the "Alliance Defending Puppies" weekly meeting. Frank has the basket of puppies; Jacob, is the wood chipper ready?
 
2013-06-30 09:51:44 PM

Anderson's Pooper: hubiestubert: Well folks, you tried. You passed a law, it was found wanting, and now you've used up your appeal. Our democracy at work.

How does all that freedom taste? I hope it tastes as good as a hazelnut and vanilla wedding cake, because I see a lot more of that in California's future. Here's to all the wedding planners, all the resorts and hotels, and all the cater waiters who will be riding higher in the saddle as all that freedom trickles down into hard currency injected deep into your economy. Bands will playing, dresses and suits will be bought or rented, and halls will be booked. You are about to taste the freedom that Massachusetts has had now for some time, and while it might feel to some like they've gotten something sticky and messy all up in their faces after all that effort, but in the end, you're going to simply have to be soothed by the economic payload that is about to drop into your laps.

You left out divorce attorneys.  More marriages makes more work for us!!


Not to mention attorneys that help people with I-129F visas and change/adjustment of status.
 
2013-06-30 09:59:41 PM

hubiestubert: Well folks, you tried. You passed a law, it was found wanting, and now you've used up your appeal. Our democracy at work.

How does all that freedom taste? I hope it tastes as good as a hazelnut and vanilla wedding cake, because I see a lot more of that in California's future. Here's to all the wedding planners, all the resorts and hotels, and all the cater waiters who will be riding higher in the saddle as all that freedom trickles down into hard currency injected deep into your economy. Bands will playing, dresses and suits will be bought or rented, and halls will be booked. You are about to taste the freedom that Massachusetts has had now for some time, and while it might feel to some like they've gotten something sticky and messy all up in their faces after all that effort, but in the end, you're going to simply have to be soothed by the economic payload that is about to drop into your laps.


Fark is not your personal erotica site.
 
2013-06-30 10:02:46 PM

James F. Campbell: hubiestubert: Well folks, you tried. You passed a law, it was found wanting, and now you've used up your appeal. Our democracy at work.

How does all that freedom taste? I hope it tastes as good as a hazelnut and vanilla wedding cake, because I see a lot more of that in California's future. Here's to all the wedding planners, all the resorts and hotels, and all the cater waiters who will be riding higher in the saddle as all that freedom trickles down into hard currency injected deep into your economy. Bands will playing, dresses and suits will be bought or rented, and halls will be booked. You are about to taste the freedom that Massachusetts has had now for some time, and while it might feel to some like they've gotten something sticky and messy all up in their faces after all that effort, but in the end, you're going to simply have to be soothed by the economic payload that is about to drop into your laps.

Fark is not your personal erotica site.


Sirrah, I am a foodservice professional. I cannot help it that so many folks have taken descriptors from my industry into their Sodomite ways. TASTE THE FREEDOM!
 
2013-06-30 10:03:06 PM

HighOnCraic: [howdoyoulikethemapples?]


Well played, extra point for posting that from the Big Apple.
 
2013-06-30 10:13:04 PM

winterbraid: fusillade762: The group's name? The "Alliance Defending Freedom". I shiat you not.  Defending your freedom not to get gay married since 1994!

I now call to order the "Alliance Defending Puppies" weekly meeting. Frank has the basket of puppies; Jacob, is the wood chipper ready?


ROFL.
 
2013-06-30 10:14:42 PM
Im just waiting for the GOP to claim Reagan was for gay marriage from day one.
 
2013-06-30 10:16:18 PM

mispelled username: Im just waiting for the GOP to claim Reagan was for gay marriage from day one.


He did his part to prevent gay marriage by waiting so long to acknowledge AIDS.
 
2013-06-30 10:32:28 PM

gimmegimme: mispelled username: Im just waiting for the GOP to claim Reagan was for gay marriage from day one.

He did his part to prevent gay marriage by waiting so long to acknowledge AIDS.


You know it's a myth made up by Larry Kramer/ACT UP that Reagan didn't acknowledge/mention AIDS for XX amount of time.
 
Displayed 50 of 93 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report