Happy Atheist Forum

it's coming today! In about an hour to 3 hours Walker will be handing down his decision! I am so nervous... :pop:  

It's not official yet, put there has been a leak, Proposition 8 has been overturned by John Walker! The system finally works!

Yeah!  

IT"S OFFICIAL! Prop. 8 is OVERTURNED! WE HAVE WON THE BATTLE< NOW FOR THE WAR!

Yay!  Take THAT, jerkwads!  Especially the Mormon church.  I for one am GLAD you wasted so much money and made your position of intolerance crystal clear, only to have the law deemed unconstitutional!

This is really good news.
 :bananacolor:  

Quote from: "GAYtheist"IT"S OFFICIAL! Prop. 8 is OVERTURNED! WE HAVE WON THE BATTLE< NOW FOR THE WAR!

Congratulations!  

A triumph of love over hate is a very good thing.

Quote from: "pinkocommie"Yay!  Take THAT, jerkwads!  Especially the Mormon church.  I for one am GLAD you wasted so much money and made your position of intolerance crystal clear, only to have the law deemed unconstitutional!

This is really good news.
 :bananacolor:  

Ditto.

Quote from: "GAYtheist"IT"S OFFICIAL! Prop. 8 is OVERTURNED! WE HAVE WON THE BATTLE< NOW FOR THE WAR!

I hope the US Supreme Court has the testicular fortitude to deem this unconstitutional as well.

I have a Mormon friend who truly believes, because the Imperial Wizard (or whatever those whackos call their HMFIC) told them, that the church would be required to perform gay marriages inside of the temples if gay marriage were to be legalized. Unbelievable that they would believe that. He claims that is his only issue with it.

A little bit of faith is restored in humanity today.  

First off: YAY!  :crazy:

BTW: Speaking of the wonderful 14th Amendment which made this possible, Republicans want to change it (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100803/ap_on_go_co/us_republicans_birthright_citizenship).

Hurray for equality!

I went down to the celebration walk in San Diego to photograph for the newspaper, anyone care for a sneak peak?

 Also, it's funny how you go to one little gay rights rally and suddenly your family is questioning your sexuality. Sigh . . . FML.

Good news indeed  :headbang:

Show us the photos please Laser!

The ruling on this was quite lengthy (138 pages) and impressively written. It's truly worth a read.

Here are some key excerpts:http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/08/04/some-key-excerpts-from-the-proposition-8-ruling/

Here is the whole bloody thing: http://www.scribd.com/doc/35374462/Prop-8-Ruling-FINAL

Photos from the day, I plan to submit most of these to the newspaper so please no downloading (they're tagged with my copyright info anyway).

Photos Here! (http://ryanclarkphotography.com/?p=343)

Please leave comments!

Quote from: "Laser Sailor"Photos from the day, I plan to submit most of these to the newspaper so please no downloading (they're tagged with my copyright info anyway).

Photos Here! (http://ryanclarkphotography.com/?p=343)

Please leave comments!

{nerdmode}
Excellent shots with lovely colour saturation!
{/nerdmode}

Quote from: "Tank"{nerdmode}
Excellent shots with lovely colour saturation!
{/nerdmode}

Thanks! I found a way to almost simulate Kodachrome 64 digitally. I cried when Kodak announced they were not going to make it anymore, I never got a chance to use it

Quote from: "Laser Sailor"

Quote from: "Tank"{nerdmode}
Excellent shots with lovely colour saturation!
{/nerdmode}

Thanks! I found a way to almost simulate Kodachrome 64 digitally. I cried when Kodak announced they were not going to make it anymore, I never got a chance to use it :D

It's hard not to feel a bit nervous about the appeal, though; this Supreme Court has a huge conservative bent, and their decision will not be subject to appeal.  The good news is that they will now have to justify overturning a lower-court ruling, rather than simply appealing to precedent, as I'm sure Roberts/Scalia/Thomas would prefer to do; if they wish to endorse bigotry, they shall now be forced to justify it in writing.  Do they want that for a legacy?

Should this be overturned on appeal, that will almost certainly be the Dred Scott decision of the gay-rights movement.

Dred Scott (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott) made interesting reading. Let us hope that things have improved since then. Throwing out the appeal would, in the eyes of most of Europe, make the USA look like a very backward country. Not that that would particularly matter but it would continue to make the US look like a less trustworthy and reasonable partner and erode her position as a credible leader of the free world.

I've been crying from joy for since I found out. I've been an activist for a couple years now, and it's been days like today I've been waiting for, a day when we see the system actually work.

WIN!!!!

I am so damn pissed at the Republicans for trying to fuck with the 14th amendment, but today, I'm just excited that they finally repealed Prop. 8.

This deserves an entire wallpaper of excited emoticons!  :bananacolor:  :yay:  lol  :)  :D  :bananacolor:  :hmm:  :D  
 :bananacolor:  :hail:  :bananacolor:  :yay:  :yay:  :hail:   :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  lol  :bananacolor:  lol  roflol  :hmm:  :cool:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :D  :yay:  :yay:  :cool:
 :yay:  lol  :cool:  :bananacolor:  :headbang:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  lol  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  lol  roflol  :D  :cool:  :bananacolor:  :hail:  :bananacolor:  :cool:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :hail:
 :D  :yay:  :bananacolor:  :yay:  :)  :hail:  :hail:  :yay:  :D  :pop:  roflol  lol  :yay:  :D  :bananacolor:  :headbang:  :bananacolor:  :yay:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:
 :yay:  lol  :bananacolor:  lol  lol  :hail:  :bananacolor:
 :hail:  :D  :hail:  :D   :bananacolor:  :D  :drool  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :D  :pop:  roflol  lol  :bananacolor:  roflol  :D  :D  roflol  :bananacolor:  lol  :headbang:
 :D  :headbang:  :hmm:  :D  :bananacolor:  :D  :drool  :bananacolor:
 lol  :D  :D  :D  :bananacolor:  :yay:  :pop:  :bananacolor:  :drool  :crazy:  :bananacolor:  :yay:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:

I think that gives the proper level of excitement.

I'm impressed, KebertX.  That's some slick usage of smilies you got going on there.  Also, very appropriate expression of how awesome this ruling is.

Quote from: "GAYtheist"I've been crying from joy for since I found out. I've been an activist for a couple years now, and it's been days like today I've been waiting for, a day when we see the system actually work.

Congrats!   Do you live in California?

Quote from: "Sophus"

Quote from: "GAYtheist"I've been crying from joy for since I found out. I've been an activist for a couple years now, and it's been days like today I've been waiting for, a day when we see the system actually work.

Congrats!   Do you live in California?

No, I'm in Seattle right now, but I fought Question 1 in Maine which was basically the same thing as prop 8. We lost there, and I've been paying close attention ever since.

The American [strike:23fquliz]Anti[/strike:23fquliz]-Family Association is wanting to impeach Judge Walker because:

Quote from: "url=http://www.examiner.com/x-28442-LA-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m8d6-American-Family-Association-seeks-to-impeach-Prop-8-judge-who-overturned-California-gay-marrige-ban]The Examiner[/url]"]Walker's decision overturning Prop 8 "frustrated the express will of seven million Californians who went to the polls to shape their state's public policy on marriage;"
"Judge Walker is an open homosexual, and should have recused himself from this case due to his obvious conflict of interest. "
"Federal judges hold office only 'during good Behaviour,' and ...Judge Walker's ruling is not 'good Behaviour.'"

Bunch of whiners. What's interesting, as Rachel Maddow had noted last night, why aren't the Republicans making more noise about this?

Quote="The Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/x-28442-LA-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m8d6-American-Family-Association-seeks-to-impeach-Prop-8-judge-who-overturned-California-gay-marrige-ban)
"Judge Walker is an open homosexual, and should have recused himself from this case due to his obvious conflict of interest. "
"Federal judges hold office only 'during good Behaviour,' and ...Judge Walker's ruling is not 'good Behaviour.'"

Congrats GAYtheist and all in your success, your Judge Walker sounds like a top bloke.

Quote from: "Sophus"...why aren't the Republicans making more noise about this?

Maybe this has something to do with it: (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-grenell/republican-appointed-judg_b_673355.html)

QuoteBut what you didn't hear from the political left and mainstream media is that U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker was appointed by a Republican president [Bush I] and that the lawyer, former Solicitor General Ted Olson, who successfully argued the case on behalf of gays and lesbians, is a Republican.

 ;)

That's a good point Recusant. It still comes as a bit of a surprise to me though. Especially with this sudden jump toward conservative extremism where even conservatives are sometimes deemed "not conservative enough". But let's hope for a repeat ruling in the Supreme Court!

Speaking of which, Schwartzenegger wants the right for same-sex couples to marry to be reinstated immediately. I agree with the Governator but the counter argument is it should be held off until after a higher ruling to prevent any heartache. Do you think there's a chance the Supreme Court would really strip existing gay and lesbian couples of their marriages? This, to me, just seems like a further reason to make same-sex marriage a federal right. I keep going back and forth about whether or not the SC will make the right decision on this. Right now I'm feeling pretty good about it.

For those nerds like me who have been so curious to see the evidence presented in this court case here is the video and document evidence used in  Perry v. Schwarzenegger (https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/evidence/index.html)

Have fun!

I hear you, Soph.  It really boils down to Kennedy, who's now the moderate swing vote; and from everything I've read, he will uphold this.

I just dread the idea that he might cave to Scalia's pressure.

Ugh, just got into a LONG 'debate' about this on faceboook... >.>. Nonetheless, this is a step. Great news!

Quote from: "Cite134"Ugh, just got into a LONG 'debate' about this on faceboook... >.>. Nonetheless, this is a step. Great news!

Link to debate please.  

Judge Walker to rule on same-sex marriages today - will determine if they can resume immediately (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/08/12/2010-08-12_california_judge_vaughn_walker_to_rule_thursday_if_samesex_marriages_can_resume_.html)

I hope he does allow the immediate restart as it sends a clear signal that the California legislature are a strong legislature and don't need their decisions rubber stamped for them. To wait for that later hearing would just send a message of 'we're not sure, lets wait till mummy gets home and ask her.'

Quote from: "Tank"I hope he does allow the immediate restart as it sends a clear signal that the California legislature are a strong legislature and don't need their decisions rubber stamped for them. To wait for that later hearing would just send a message of 'we're not sure, lets wait till mummy gets home and ask her.'

Good point. I'm predicting he will. Judging from his explosive language in the 136 page ruling, Walker seems to have a very firm stance on this.

The LA Times is reporting he will issue his decision before noon PST.

This just in:  http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/08/12/walker-lifts-stay-on-prop-8-ruling-gay-marriages-to-resume-next-week/

San Francisco Federal Judge Vaughn Walker on Thursday lifted the stay on his ruling from last week, in which he found that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

One caveat: Walker extended a temporary stay until August 18, in order to give Proposition 8 supporters â€" and the defendants in the case â€" time to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit. So gay marriage cannot yet resume in the Golden State.

Yes.  I'm now wondering if it will be appealed at all.  His reasoning is solid, sound, and if his reasoning carries the Supreme Court, the appellants will have to resort to the Amendment process, and I don't think that will work.

Quote from: "Tank"I hope he does allow the immediate restart as it sends a clear signal that the California legislature are a strong legislature and don't need their decisions rubber stamped for them. To wait for that later hearing would just send a message of 'we're not sure, lets wait till mummy gets home and ask her.'

I go by the name of "Legit." It was indeed quite frustrating.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pro ... 5302533211 (http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/profile.php?id=100000044816524&v=wall&story_fbid=141675302533211)

ugh, wrong quote tank...ahah. But here there is the link if you're interested. If you find anything inaccurate in my responses PLEASE point them out if you can .

Some less than great news.

Quote from: "url=http://www.turlockjournal.com/news/article/5228/]Turlock Journal[/url]"]California’s ban on same-sex marriages, scheduled to end today, will last at least until December.

:bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  This is awesome! Let's just hope that the douchebag brigade doesn't drag this out!

This is really looking up because it seems gay-rights is becoming more and more important to a number of Republicans (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/are_republicans_co-opting_gay.html). Hopefully this means Obama will be less afraid to stand up for it too (honestly, I think he is for gay marriage but is playing it politically safe).

One question about this Prop 8 case, which states will it affect should it make its way to the Supreme Court? All thirty some states that put the issue up to a vote, all fifty states, or California alone?

If the Supreme Court of the US takes the case on and rules that bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional, then according to my understanding, the 14th Amendment is applicable, which means that the bans nationwide will be struck down. I would imagine that there would then be some sort of attempt to get around the Supreme Court's ruling. I'm only a desultory amateur "legal scholar" though, not even a jail-house lawyer, so my understanding may be incorrect.  

I was hoping that would be the case. California's laws on this issue are more complex than most states. Hope there's not a loophole of some sort. If it the case I and if the Prop 8 supporters lose for a second time I wonder if if they will avoid taking it to the Supreme Court so as to prevent the possibility handing the entire nation over to Satan.  

So far as I understand, until the USSC takes a stand, the decision will only be relevant in the 9th Circuit's area, which is 14 (?) western states.

Quote from: "Sophus"I was hoping that would be the case. California's laws on this issue are more complex than most states. Hope there's not a loophole of some sort. If it the case I and if the Prop 8 supporters lose for a second time I wonder if if they will avoid taking it to the Supreme Court so as to prevent the possibility handing the entire nation over to Satan.  :bananacolor:

What's the latest on this case? Anyone know?

Btw, here's what happened in my state today:

Quote from: "url=http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/22/florida.gay.adoptions/index.html]CNN[/url]"]
A Florida appeals court Wednesday struck down a state law barring gay men and lesbians from adoption on the basis of equal protection under law.
The Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal upheld a trial court ruling that Florida's explicit ban was unconstitutional, noting that the state's adoption law required officials to assess potential adoptive parents in "the best interests of the child."

Thank you all for such a warm welcome, with the pages upon pages of links to rules and admonishments not to look for humour here.   I assure you humour isn't the only thing I am looking for.  At my age there is one thing I can still hold ... a sound and serious conversation.

Quote from: "Mistermischief"Thank you all for such a warm welcome, with the pages upon pages of links to rules and admonishments not to look for humour here.   :hmm:

Quote from: "Mistermischief"Thank you all for such a warm welcome, with the pages upon pages of links to rules and admonishments not to look for humour here.   I assure you humour isn't the only thing I am looking for.  At my age there is one thing I can still hold ... a sound and serious conversation.

Damn detected.