Comments on: Social conservatives worry about ‘activist’ justices in gay marriage case

By: micrositez

micrositez — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:43:07 +0000

are the judges running the country or the people?

By: micrositez

micrositez — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:43:07 +0000

are the judges running the country or the people?

By: micrositez

micrositez — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:43:07 +0000

are the judges running the country or the people?

By: mp4 to dvd

mp4 to dvd — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:43:20 +0000

As mentioned by Scott ,”this is something that belongs in the legislature and something that should be a process that goes through the state Constitution, not seven individuals.”
Support this point.I think to make decision on this case is beyond the court's grasp

By: catholic statues

catholic statues — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:15:22 +0000

Like I mentioned on another post, that Im from Germany and SSM is possible here, also in the Netherlands but in the catholic church are many difference on that. So what is right and what is wrong ….?

By: slincoln

slincoln — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:03:35 +0000

They should be worried. I doubt the justices are gullible enough to find their unconstitutional law legal, either. This means that they will have to start treating other people equally and its just so scary!

By: MarlaStevens

MarlaStevens — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:10:44 +0000

Granting equal access to a law by removing a ban to equal access to it isn't changing the law or creating new law, as would be required to qualify as judicial activism. The justices have bent over backwards already to have their actions transparent and for the public to be able to see them being deliberative and interpretive rather than legislative. That these groups are already crying foul — had even cried foul before a word was uttered in oral argument before the court — exposes those cries as illegitimate. They even had the gall to call the choice of Iowa itself by the plaintiff's attorneys as judicial activism — when there was no judge involved in that decision at all and despite that it was no different than what their own lawyers do in choosing where to test their latest attacks on women's right to reproductive choice or the choice of Utah by the recent Blackwater Iraq atrocity case defendants as their best shot to avoid being held accountable or the choice of Virginia by the federal prosecutors in the Beltway sniper cases as the affected state most likely to give the defendants the death penalty. Really, if it didn't involve so much pain and injustice for so many families currently denied equal access to civil marriage in Iowa, these activists' cries of “wolf” would be downright laughable!!

By: aaglaas

aaglaas — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:00:49 +0000

Here is a stark snapshot between those who want to deny human rights to other American citizens, and those who want our message to the world of being the country of 'freedom, liberty and justice for all' to actually be true:

http://jointheimpact.wetpaint.com/page/Aaron%27...

By: manticore388

manticore388 — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:48:03 +0000

You just have to love that if judges make a ruling someone doesn't agree with, they're “activist judges”. If they make a ruling someone agrees with, they “upheld the constitution”.

Blather, blather, blather, blather…