🚀 go-pugleaf

On Nov 2, 7:12 pm, nob...@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) wrote:
> kujebak <kuje...@eudoramail.com> writes:
> > On Nov 2, 12:31 pm, nob...@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) wrote:
> >> Ian B MacLure <i...@svpal.org> writes:
>
> >> > nob...@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) wrote in
> >> >news:87iqrbt7xu.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net:
>
> >> >            [snip]
>
> >> >> The California Supreme Court is far less likely to be wrong than
> >> >> random usenet posters.
>
> >> >            The ultimate power to decide belongs to the people.
> >> >            If the CA Constitution is changed the only recourse
> >> >            the CASC would have would be to find the amendment
> >> >            in violation of the US Constitution. And wouldn't that
> >> >            set up an interesting situation.
>
> >> Bogus argument - we weren't talking about who had "the ultimate power
> >> to decide" but rather whether civil unions are equivalent to marriage
> >> as a matter of fact.  The California Supreme Court's decision stated
> >> that these were not equivalent and gave a number of reasons.  Their
> >> opinion is far more likely to be factually correct then the opinion of
> >> some random assortment of people who have spent no real time thinking
> >> it through.
>
> >> Our system of government allows the voters to make decisions that
> >> ignore the facts, and the voters have no more ability to change what
> >> those facts actually are than they have the ability to override the
> >> laws of physics.
>
> > But in this case the voters do have the ability to change
> > the decision of the state Supreme Court, without having
> > to change, or even further deliberate any of the facts ;-)
>
> Irrelevant - we were discussing whether or not marriage and
> domestic partnerships were equivalent, and the California Supreme
> Court's opinion on that is one of the best ones to go with given
> the effort the court went to in making its decision.  This is a
> matter of fact, not a matter of what the voters decide to do.
>
> Are you too daft to understand the distinction?

As I said before, I don't give a rats ass about the distinction
between marriage and domestic partnerships. The only thing
I care about is the judiciary respecting the will of the voters.


- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -