WITH JUDGES LIKE THIS WHO NEEDS A GOVERNMENT

[delayjf]

A panel of three Judges have decided in Mass, what's right and what's wrong. Again, why do we need and executive and legislative branch when we can just defer to them: with all their superior intellect.

[DJofSD]

Hey, Jeff,

Here's another one: the guy that killed the 11 year old girl in Florida, he was in violation of his parole -- and a judge let him go!

DJofSD

[ljb]

We have three branches of government. They are supposed to balance each other out. Of course one party seems to have control of two branches and is trying to gain control of the third. Would you prefer that?

[JustRalph]

Ohio enacts law banning gay marriage
Reuters, 02.06.04, 5:13 PM ET

By Jim Leckrone

COLUMBUS, Ohio, Feb 6 (Reuters) - Ohio on Friday enacted one of the most far-reaching gay marriage bans yet passed by a state in a law that also refuses benefits such as health insurance to the unwed partners of state workers, gay or not.

With Republican Gov. Bob Taft's signature, Ohio reaffirmed a stance already adopted in more than three dozen other U.S. states that do not recognize the legality of same-sex unions, a hot-button issue in this presidential election year.

"First and foremost, this is not a law of intolerance," Taft said. "I do not endorse, nor does this law provide for, discrimination against any Ohio citizen."

The Republican-led Ohio Legislature gave final approval to the measure on Tuesday. Taft said Ohio had to act because the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in recent opinions "redefined marriage" and cleared the way for marriages between same-sex couples. Two Canadian provinces have also approved them, and Vermont and smaller localities permit civil unions.

"As a result, Ohio could have same-sex couples who were 'married' in Massachusetts taking legal action in Ohio to recognize that marriage and to obtain the resulting benefits," Taft said.

President George W. Bush has said he believes a marriage is solely between a man and a woman and suggested an amendment to the U.S. Constitution may be needed to overcome the rulings of "activist judges."

Tim Downing, president of Ohioans for Growth and Equality, which fought the measure, said, "It's a sad day for Ohio ... this bill goes far beyond what 37 other states have done previously" and is the "most regressive ... of its kind in the nation."

He predicted it would hurt the state's economy because employers in the state and those thinking of coming in faced confusion on whether domestic partner benefits were legal, an issue that will have to be sorted out in court.

"The Defense of Marriage Act," in addition to declaring same-sex unions illegal, voids benefits such as health insurance coverage, the right to make health care decisions and the right to adopt children to unmarried partners of state workers.

WORRIES ABOUT PRIVATE-SECTOR IMPACT

Critics believe it could be used to deny domestic partner benefits now provided by private companies in Ohio -- including such giants as Procter & Gamble (nyse: PG - news - people) and Federated Department Stores (nyse: PG - news - people).

Supporters of the law insisted the provision barring benefits applied only to Ohio's roughly 60,000 state government employees.

While the measure does not prevent the private sector from offering domestic partner benefits, critics have said gay marriage opponents could cite the precedent of the law to sue employers that provide such benefits.

A spokeswoman for Procter said the company's legal department had reviewed the law and "at this point it is not going to affect the benefits we are giving to our employees." She said the company had offered domestic partner benefits since 1999.

The American Civil Liberties Union has said it was weighing a lawsuit challenging the law as discriminatory.

Taft said the law provided several protections, including permission for same-sex partner benefits to be negotiated in state contracts with unions and a reaffirmation that churches could still perform and sanctify civil unions between same-sex couples.

[Tom]

Originally posted by DJofSD
Hey, Jeff,

Here's another one: the guy that killed the 11 year old girl in Florida, he was in violation of his parole -- and a judge let him go!

DJofSD
His name is Judge Rapkin. He is as guilty of murder as the thug he refursed to put back in jail for violating his parol THREE TIMES IN A YEAR!!!!!
Remember that name in your prayers, when you ask God to destroy evil in our world. Tis POS murdering judge deserve to fry in Hell, and the sooner the better.
:mad:

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb
We have three branches of government. They are supposed to balance each other out. Of course one party seems to have control of two branches and is trying to gain control of the third. Would you prefer that?

What a tired old record you have become. Is the is the evolution of a troll?

[ljb]

Tom,
Some on this board must be reminded daily of these facts. Others need hourly reminders. You fit into one of these groups, can you guess which one?

[ljb]

And why is there no mention of that panel of judges that appointed the loser to the presidency?

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb
And why is there no mention of that panel of judges that appointed the loser to the presidency?
Give it up, you cry-baby spin doctor.
BUSH WON!
BUSH WON!
No matter how hard Gore tried to steal the election by not counting absentee ballots and trying to redefine how a vote is counted, he still lost.
You libs just can't admitt the stiff one was rejected by the system.
HaHaHa.....you guys must swallow bile every night you are so desperate. You know, that is how Smeagel turned into Gollum inthe Lord of the Rings......go play with YOUR precious for a while!
HEHEHEHE

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb
And why is there no mention of that panel of judges that appointed the loser to the presidency?
You show your classlessness by sticking your own little political agenda into a thread about an innocent little girl murderd. You try to compare it an election.
L, what is your major malfunction?

On second thought, never mind....no one really cares.
BUTBYFT!

[ljb]

Well based on your replies, you are the hourly list.

[ljb]

Tom said " you show your classlessness by sticking your own little political agenda into a thread about an innocent little girl murderd."

Sorry Tom but, this thread is about some judges in Mass. and gay marriages.
Am i going to have to remind you of what threads are about also ?
Maybe you should just take a break, try to get a good nights sleep and maybe you'll feel better in the` morning.
night Tom.

[Tom]

Judges in Mass have zero to do with the Supreme Court.
Like your post have to do with reality. Zero.
Sleep tight, L......GW Bush is n the job and protecting everyone.
Even you.
Tough why, I'll nver understand.

[ljb]

Tom,
Note topic title. "With Judges Like this who needs a government"
Don't believe this means just Mass judges. Hope you rested well, you were really slipping last night.
Thinking Bush is protecting us is like the Iraqis thought Saddam was protecting them.
Don't you ever feel bad knowing you are one of the fooled?

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb
Tom,
Note topic title. "With Judges Like this who needs a government"
Don't believe this means just Mass judges. Hope you rested well, you were really slipping last night.
Thinking Bush is protecting us is like the Iraqis thought Saddam was protecting them.
Don't you ever feel bad knowing you are one of the fooled?

God, I could never lseep at night with one of YOUR bozo lib idiots in the white house.

101

[ljb]

Tom,
Get lots of rest while you can!

7

[delayjf]

Where is the so called balance of power when a three panal court can mandate that a state must provide or pass some legislative act that suits it's (the court's) opinions. Despite the fact that the majority of citizens in the state oppose the legislation.

I for one would love to see the Gov and the legislature tell the court to stick their opinion where the sun doesn't shine. Boy, imagine that, what would the court do, send their law clerks and residents out to the capitol to seize and take control.

I guess it's only considered activism when you disagree with the opinion. What you can't win at the ballot box, you try to steal through the courts.

[ljb]

delayjf,
Does this mean you don't agree with the courts opinion?

[delayjf]

Thats correct, I don't agree with the decision. But more importantly, the people of Mass don't either.

[ljb]

Well, I'm just learning here but I always thought it was the legislative branch's job to write the laws, the administrative branch enforces the laws and the judicial interpets the laws. And that is why we need a government.

[Tom]

Ljb,
You are learning slowly if at all.
The laws have been passed, and this guy broke them - seriously broke them. When he was released from jail in 2003, he was arrested for drugs within 10 days. He vileate parole several times and each time, weak willed, spinless, liberal POS judges refused to do the right thing and put this murder back in jail. Their perception of HIS rights allowed him to deprive a little girl of her life. The judicial branch has failed to protect us long enough.
And your nitpicking about this whole topic is just plain disgusting.
Stop playing politics and grow up.

[ljb]

Tom,
You are not learning at all. This topic is about 3 judges in Mass and gay marriages. PLEASE think before you post.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by ljb
Tom,
You are not learning at all. This topic is about 3 judges in Mass and gay marriages. PLEASE think before you post.

I think a bunch of ground has been covered here.........

tom.....I got the ring.......ordered the flowers and rented a tux.....

meet you in Mass 6 months from today?


Lefty says he will be the best man.......................

we will finally have what we have always wanted.......

A Simian Union!

[Hosshead]

I'll bring the shotgun ! (and guitar)

[delayjf]

LJB

That's exactly my point, up until this month, the people of the State of Mass have deemed Gay marriage as not in appropriate or in line with the social morals of that state, now the courts (again 3 judges) have decided in their infinate wisdom that the Legislature must pass a gay marriage law within the next 6 months, how do you interpret a law thats not on the books?

[ljb]

Delayjf,
I am not privy to the details. Cannot respond as to how the judges interpeted the law. Don't have any idea what they based their decision on. Don't even know what their decision was. I was just entering my opinion as to why we have/need three branches of government.
If in fact this ruling is against the wishes of the masses, the legislative branch will surely pass laws making it illeagle. And the administrative branch will enforce these laws. and so forth.