Article View: sac.general
Article #209Re: Vote NO on Prop Eight
From: Bill Z.
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 21:20
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 21:20
38 lines
3106 bytes
3106 bytes
"D. Stussy" <spam@bde-arc.ampr.org> writes: > "Bill Z." <nobody@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message > news:871vy0mekt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net... >> "D. Stussy" <spam@bde-arc.ampr.org> writes: >> > "Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message >> > news:c0c5fef993b772586ad491e239a5debe@dizum.com... >> >> Please Vote No on Proposition Eight. >> >> >> >> Don't allow discrimination against >> >> anyone! >> > >> > Vote Yes on Prop 8. They already have "equal rights" - it's called the >> > "registered domestic partnership." We don't need more laws. >> >> If your opinion really is "We don't need more laws," then you should >> vote *against* Proposition 8, which creates a new law. :-) > > Actually, it doesn't. All it does is clarify a definition. Wrong - it eliminates a right that people now have (whether you agree with that right or not), and the wording of the proposition is not a definition. You can't wiggle out of it - if you say "we don't need more laws", then you should vote against Proposition 8 because it in fact creates a new law. If you don't like the conclusion, maybe you should do the sensible thing and change your premise. :-) >> Humor about poor reasoning aside, the California Supreme Court >> addressed the issue of whether a domestic partnership conveys >> the same rights as marriage and concluded that it does not. >> Read the decision for details. > > Courts can be wrong. The California Supreme Court is far less likely to be wrong than random usenet posters.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<87iqrbt7xu.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!flpi089.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flpi088.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com.POSTED!79589bed!not-for-mailReferences:
<c0c5fef993b772586ad491e239a5debe@dizum.com> <ge88u2$75q$1@snarked.org> <871vy0mekt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <geahc1$e50$2@snarked.org>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: f824f,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Thread: 102fd5,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Thread: 107d03,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Thread: 10d50a,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Attributes: gidf824f,gid102fd5,gid107d03,gid10d50a,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!flpi089.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flpi088.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com.POSTED!79589bed!not-for-mail Newsgroups: sac.general,ba.general,ba.politics,la.general,scruz.general Subject: Re: Vote NO on Prop Eight References: <c0c5fef993b772586ad491e239a5debe@dizum.com> <ge88u2$75q$1@snarked.org> <871vy0mekt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <geahc1$e50$2@snarked.org> From: nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) Message-ID: <87iqrbt7xu.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:xVyos72tik/Whgq80fxoICSN7nM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 38 NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.233.20.69 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com 1225314887 ST000 209.233.20.69 (Wed, 29 Oct 2008 17:14:47 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 17:14:47 EDT Organization: at&t http://my.att.net/ X-UserInfo1: TSU[@SNFTJSIRTPXNCOF_W\@PJ_^PBQLGPQRZUEK@YUDUWYAKVUOPCW[ML\JXUCKVFDYZKBMSFX^OMSAFNTINTDDMVW[X\THOPXZRVOCJTUTPC\_JSBVX\KAOTBAJBVMZTYAKMNLDI_MFDSSOLXINH__FS^\WQGHGI^C@E[A_CF\AQLDQ\BTMPLDFNVUQ_VM Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:20:13 -0700