Comments on: Rants Expects Marriage Amendment To Be Overshadowed in House

By: RegularJoe

RegularJoe — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:26:06 +0000

Pat is smarter... ...than that. Pat's smart enough to understand how the Constitution sets up the checks and balances between the branches of government. Judge Hanson, having a significant grasp of the Constitution and case law, found the act to be unconstitutional. One would have to be a serious bigot to support such a discriminatory act, and the judge apparently isn't. Sure, some homophobes could spin Judge Hanson's action as "subverting the legislature". The rest of us know that one of the jobs of the judicial branch is to provide a check against the other two coequal branches. A judge, having looked at the facts at hand in a specific case, found a particular law to be unconstitutional...and took 63 pages to explain exactly why...citing US and Iowa law. No shit. Look it up. A judge did his job, and in doing so found out some nut jobs in the legislature screwed up bad, screwing citizens of their rights. You know, those "rights" they talk about on our flag: "Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain"...yep, those rights. Some sick bastards passed a law that sought to TAKE AWAY our rights. Fortunately for the Constitution and We The People, a judge saw the deal for what it was and started the process of fixing the legislature's screwing of it's citizenry. Oh, in an act of judicial fairness, let's not forget that same judge stayed (put on hold) the ruling...giving the hate mongers time to fight for discrimination and erode our constitution.

Now there's a judicial process that may lead to the supreme court - of Iowa or even of the US. But there *is* a process. Until the process is complete, it'd be foolish of the legislature to act...the very constitutionality of this form of hatred is at stake so the legislature can't possibly know what will be permissible until the courts rule. It's possible that ultimately hate will prevail in the courts, leaving those sicker members of the legislature with nothing further to do on the issue.

Strangely enough, many of the folks who support stripping us of our constitutional rights are the same ones who bitch about the government regulating too many aspects of our lives. Hypocritical bastards, all...and likely friends of Fred Phelps or relying on Phelpsian rationalizing. Looks like Radical Rants and the Raving Rong are at it again.

By: MTR

MTR — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:26:30 +0000

We DO see the courts trying to subvert the legislature Pat Murphy's comment "we don't see the court in here trying to subvert the legislature" couldn't be further from the truth.

The reason we are where we are with same-sex marriage in Iowa is because the court (Judge Hanson) subverted the legislature by throwing the Defense of Marriage Act out the window.

C'mon, Pat, you're smarter than that ... aren't you?

By: RegularJoe

RegularJoe — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:29:39 +0000

Radical Rants... ...and the Raving Rongs (They damned sure ain't 'Right') just can't help but get all tweaked out and spout their collective hatred when their invisible friends (or the voices in their heads) corrupt the message of an otherwise peaceful and loving religion. Sorry, Chris, but two people getting married, regardless of their gender, has no impact on your marriage, or those of your fellow cultists...unless your marriage is that fucked up to begin with. If you and your wife decide to divorce because other couples are allowed to marry, you've got much bigger problems.

Perhaps it's time we learned something from Germany. Marriage there is a civil process...you get married in a civil ceremony performed by a civil administrator (a magistrate). After you've fulfilled your legal requirements, you're welcome to whatever religious ceremony you and your faith can arrange. This separates the legal/statutory requirements from whatever particular/peculiar brouhaha one's invisible friends might require.

You see, Chris, that although we all have different perspectives on faith, we all fall under the same Constitution and laws in our civil society. If your personal hate-inspired cult is against families and children, that's fine...but our society isn't. I don't expect you to talk like a pirate, or refrain from pork, or strive for samsara, or anything else that your mythos opposes. Our Constitution and laws are opposed to discrimination, however, because we as citizens are opposed to discrimination. Keep your hate-filled diatribes in your cult's meeting place and out of our house - the people's house. The Rants and Raves do not speak for We The People.

By: RegularJoe

RegularJoe — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Radical Rants… …and the Raving Rongs (They damned sure ain’t ‘Right’) just can’t help but get all tweaked out and spout their collective hatred when their invisible friends (or the voices in their heads) corrupt the message of an otherwise peaceful and loving religion. Sorry, Chris, but two people getting married, regardless of their gender, has no impact on your marriage, or those of your fellow cultists…unless your marriage is that fucked up to begin with. If you and your wife decide to divorce because other couples are allowed to marry, you’ve got much bigger problems.
Perhaps it’s time we learned something from Germany. Marriage there is a civil process…you get married in a civil ceremony performed by a civil administrator (a magistrate). After you’ve fulfilled your legal requirements, you’re welcome to whatever religious ceremony you and your faith can arrange. This separates the legal/statutory requirements from whatever particular/peculiar brouhaha one’s invisible friends might require.
You see, Chris, that although we all have different perspectives on faith, we all fall under the same Constitution and laws in our civil society. If your personal hate-inspired cult is against families and children, that’s fine…but our society isn’t. I don’t expect you to talk like a pirate, or refrain from pork, or strive for samsara, or anything else that your mythos opposes. Our Constitution and laws are opposed to discrimination, however, because we as citizens are opposed to discrimination. Keep your hate-filled diatribes in your cult’s meeting place and out of our house – the people’s house. The Rants and Raves do not speak for We The People.

By: MTR

MTR — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

We DO see the courts trying to subvert the legislature Pat Murphy’s comment “we don’t see the court in here trying to subvert the legislature” couldn’t be further from the truth.

The reason we are where we are with same-sex marriage in Iowa is because the court (Judge Hanson) subverted the legislature by throwing the Defense of Marriage Act out the window.

C’mon, Pat, you’re smarter than that … aren’t you?

By: RegularJoe

RegularJoe — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Pat is smarter… …than that. Pat’s smart enough to understand how the Constitution sets up the checks and balances between the branches of government. Judge Hanson, having a significant grasp of the Constitution and case law, found the act to be unconstitutional. One would have to be a serious bigot to support such a discriminatory act, and the judge apparently isn’t. Sure, some homophobes could spin Judge Hanson’s action as “subverting the legislature”. The rest of us know that one of the jobs of the judicial branch is to provide a check against the other two coequal branches. A judge, having looked at the facts at hand in a specific case, found a particular law to be unconstitutional…and took 63 pages to explain exactly why…citing US and Iowa law. No shit. Look it up. A judge did his job, and in doing so found out some nut jobs in the legislature screwed up bad, screwing citizens of their rights. You know, those “rights” they talk about on our flag: “Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain”…yep, those rights. Some sick bastards passed a law that sought to TAKE AWAY our rights. Fortunately for the Constitution and We The People, a judge saw the deal for what it was and started the process of fixing the legislature’s screwing of it’s citizenry. Oh, in an act of judicial fairness, let’s not forget that same judge stayed (put on hold) the ruling…giving the hate mongers time to fight for discrimination and erode our constitution.
Now there’s a judicial process that may lead to the supreme court – of Iowa or even of the US. But there *is* a process. Until the process is complete, it’d be foolish of the legislature to act…the very constitutionality of this form of hatred is at stake so the legislature can’t possibly know what will be permissible until the courts rule. It’s possible that ultimately hate will prevail in the courts, leaving those sicker members of the legislature with nothing further to do on the issue.
Strangely enough, many of the folks who support stripping us of our constitutional rights are the same ones who bitch about the government regulating too many aspects of our lives. Hypocritical bastards, all…and likely friends of Fred Phelps or relying on Phelpsian rationalizing. Looks like Radical Rants and the Raving Rong are at it again.