Obama: Worst President Ever? Topic

toddcommish
Posts: 4987 (1)
Hall of Famer
494 10 1 14 16 90
Prospect
You don't seem to realize that appeals courts are politically motivated, not constitutionally motivated.  So all your posturing regarding constitutionality means nothing when you only tout the decisions made by ONE particular federal appeals court (the ninth, widely considered the most liberal and coincidentally, one of the most commonly overturned by the Supreme Court).

Getting constitutional advice from the ninth circuit is like getting coaching advice from Dusty Baker
5/21/2012 7:54 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
The beauty of this is that we'll know, relatively soon, which one of us is right. Either the supreme court will refuse to hear the case, the repeal of prop 8 stands and I'm right, the court hears the case but upholds the repeal and I'm right, or it agrees to hear the case and overturns the repeal and you're right, in which case the government will have argued successfully that they have a compelling interest in restricting the rights of same sex couples to marry.
5/21/2012 8:16 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 8:16:00 PM (view original):
The beauty of this is that we'll know, relatively soon, which one of us is right. Either the supreme court will refuse to hear the case, the repeal of prop 8 stands and I'm right, the court hears the case but upholds the repeal and I'm right, or it agrees to hear the case and overturns the repeal and you're right, in which case the government will have argued successfully that they have a compelling interest in restricting the rights of same sex couples to marry.
It should be pointed out that the federal judge who ruled in favor of the repeal of Proposition 8 was himself gay and in a long-term same-sex relationship.

Seems odd that he chose not to recuse himself from that case, doesn't it?
5/21/2012 8:35 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 8:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 8:16:00 PM (view original):
The beauty of this is that we'll know, relatively soon, which one of us is right. Either the supreme court will refuse to hear the case, the repeal of prop 8 stands and I'm right, the court hears the case but upholds the repeal and I'm right, or it agrees to hear the case and overturns the repeal and you're right, in which case the government will have argued successfully that they have a compelling interest in restricting the rights of same sex couples to marry.
It should be pointed out that the federal judge who ruled in favor of the repeal of Proposition 8 was himself gay and in a long-term same-sex relationship.

Seems odd that he chose not to recuse himself from that case, doesn't it?
Why is that odd?
5/21/2012 8:41 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
Because there is absolutely no way that might even have the slightest appearance of being a possible conflict on interest, right?
5/21/2012 8:56 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Because there is absolutely no way that might even have the slightest appearance of being a possible conflict on interest, right?
Why would being gay be a conflict of interest?
5/21/2012 10:04 PM
crackatoeha
Posts: 305 (0)
Hall of Famer
101 10 4 93 4 1
Prospect
This clown is a Troll, obama paid troll at that, leave him alone, you are wasting your time.
5/21/2012 10:09 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 10:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Because there is absolutely no way that might even have the slightest appearance of being a possible conflict on interest, right?
Why would being gay be a conflict of interest?
A federal judge in a same-sex relationship ruling on case involving the constitutionality of same-sex marriage?

Oh gosh, you're right.  No appearance of conflict there.
5/21/2012 10:14 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 10:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 10:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Because there is absolutely no way that might even have the slightest appearance of being a possible conflict on interest, right?
Why would being gay be a conflict of interest?
A federal judge in a same-sex relationship ruling on case involving the constitutionality of same-sex marriage?

Oh gosh, you're right.  No appearance of conflict there.
Spell it out for me.  Why would that be a conflict?
5/21/2012 10:20 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
I'll leave that as your homework for the evening.
5/21/2012 10:25 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Unless there isn't a conflict?
5/21/2012 10:29 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
That would fit in would your ideal world view, wouldn't it?
5/21/2012 10:44 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
If it's so obvious, feel free to enlighten me.
5/21/2012 10:48 PM
genghisxcon
Posts: 5894 (0)
Hall of Famer
172 11
All Star

I assume you think any judge whose religion opposes SSM should also recuse himself, right tec?

5/21/2012 11:23 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 3:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by toddcommish on 5/21/2012 3:05:00 PM (view original):
I would say that the will of the voters in several states constitutes a compelling legal reason.
You could say that. Doesn't make it true.
The point is in the burden of proof.

Is the burden with the state constitution and the will of the people.

Is the burden with the an established civil right.
5/22/2012 12:43 AM
◂ Prev 1...61|62|63|64|65...462 Next ▸
Obama: Worst President Ever? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.