THE BORE

General => The Superdeep Borehole => Topic started by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 01:58:45 PM

Title: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 01:58:45 PM
:elephant :elephant :elephant(http://i34.tinypic.com/rbirt5.gif):elephant :elephant :elephant

Background on the case. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_v._Schwarzenegger)

An announcement from Judge Walker is expected (http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/08/03/24981) between 1:00 PM and 3:00 PM PST.

The anti-Prop 8 defendents have already filed a Motion for Stay Pending Appeal (http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/08/04/expect-a-win-for-plaintiffs-and-gay-marriage-in-perry-prop8-case/) - a pretty strong tell that they got their asses handed to them. :-*

EB posters: will the legalization and mainstream acceptance of homosinuality reduce the perverse pleasure you take from your Godless existence? Also, is anyone else planning to get married today, before the Lifestyle Indoctrination Vans arrive?

UPDATE 1:38 PM:
BREAKING: Judge Walker rules Proposition 8 unconstitutional "under both the due-process and equal-protection clauses." #prop8 #lgbt
4 minutes ago via HootSuite
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Van Cruncheon on August 04, 2010, 02:05:11 PM
i for one embrace (from the side) our new homosinual overlords and their wonderful, wonderful parties

:tauntaun
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Van Cruncheon on August 04, 2010, 02:06:34 PM
also BEST THREAD TITLE ON THE BORE EVER
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mupepe on August 04, 2010, 02:07:39 PM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick dick
[close]
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Robo on August 04, 2010, 02:11:34 PM
Hopefully having an evilbore account is enough to spare one the shackles.
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Himu on August 04, 2010, 02:12:23 PM
Got my bags ready to move to cali
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mupepe on August 04, 2010, 02:13:25 PM
Quote from: Himuro on August 04, 2010, 02:12:23 PM
Got my bags ready to move to cali
don't forget your purse :teehee
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Madrun Badrun on August 04, 2010, 02:16:34 PM
:lol
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 02:25:23 PM
can we make it illegal for gay couples to raise children?

pretty please?

with a cherry on top?
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mupepe on August 04, 2010, 02:25:48 PM
no
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 02:26:52 PM
well that sucks, then
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mandark on August 04, 2010, 02:28:45 PM
Quote from: RoboJ on August 04, 2010, 02:11:34 PM
Hopefully having an evilbore account is enough to spare earn one the shackles.

fixed
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mupepe on August 04, 2010, 02:31:45 PM
i could definitely go for some shackles.  Maybe a little whipped cream too.
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Donono on August 04, 2010, 02:33:55 PM
[youtube=560,345]T9uuPza41Uw[/youtube]
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: brob on August 04, 2010, 02:48:14 PM
(http://cdn-media.channelme.tv/media/images/000000/46/35/NTQ2MTMz_large.jpg)


 :supergay
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mr. Gundam on August 04, 2010, 03:03:33 PM
Go get 'em, gay bros!

 :supergay
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 03:12:49 PM
Just don't get a baby from Juno jr ;)
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Brehvolution on August 04, 2010, 03:40:59 PM
(http://i33.tinypic.com/30wt5jm.jpg)
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 03:59:50 PM
one more minute until the golden age of marriage is (probably) officially over :'(
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Van Cruncheon on August 04, 2010, 04:00:07 PM
you're new to this trolling thing
Title: Re: Homogeddon Countdown |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 04:01:56 PM
and youre old to this trolling thing, you fat amoeba of hair loss and bitch tits
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Van Cruncheon on August 04, 2010, 04:03:07 PM
well i NEVER
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mupepe on August 04, 2010, 04:10:32 PM
don't worry, cruncheon.  I got this.
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Brehvolution on August 04, 2010, 04:15:33 PM
What's the good word?!?!?!
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 04:19:55 PM
more like bad word LOL
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Mr. Gundam on August 04, 2010, 04:25:01 PM
Between 1:00pm and 3:00pm?

Back to construction work.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Manly construction work.  :-*
[close]
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 04:27:57 PM
im imagining every post in this thread with a lisp
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 04:29:41 PM
1:25 PM moyalynne    Bizarre - Clerk told us wait downstairs for paper copies that will come out 2p. Some tweets already reporting;I'm on ground floor now #prop8
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 04:38:14 PM
BREAKING: Judge Walker rules Proposition 8 unconstitutional "under both the due-process and equal-protection clauses." #prop8 #lgbt
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Rule Starts @ 1 PM PST | No Breeder Will Be Spared
Post by: Van Cruncheon on August 04, 2010, 04:42:46 PM
FAGBASHERS ANNIHILATED

"God Refuses to Send His Only Son Back to Earth, Cites 'All That Sexy Sexy Sin' as Deal-breaker"
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 04:46:09 PM
BREAKING: Prop 8 ruled unconstitutional
by Adam Bink
I just finished reading the meat of the decision. Chief Judge Vaughn Walker has ruled Prop 8 is unconstitutional on both Equal Protection and Due Process grounds. Huge win. The decision is likely to be appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Developing…
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 04:47:38 PM
why the hell do gay guys and gals want to get married?

i give it one year until the afterglow wears off and they realize that gay marriage is just as shitty as straight marriage
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 04:52:53 PM
Quote from: drew on August 04, 2010, 04:47:38 PM
why the hell do gay guys and gals want to get married?

i give it one year until the afterglow wears off and they realize that gay marriage is just as shitty as straight marriage

Gays already figured that out (http://onemansblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/we-want-to-be-miserable-too.jpg).  :-*
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 04:54:10 PM
damn, if they werent so close to the building that jet could have dropped cluster bombs on the protesters
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: Mr. Gundam on August 04, 2010, 04:57:52 PM
Yay for California. Hopefully Washington state follows in the same direction.
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: Mupepe on August 04, 2010, 05:09:03 PM
To be honest, I was expecting to facepalm reading that it was upheld or something.  I knew everything was in the plaintiff's favor but I'm still pessimistic like that.  I was pretty damn happy to read that shit.
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 05:55:14 PM
good to know that our kind still dominates in the eastern standard time zone (the only time zone that matters)
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: Positive Touch on August 04, 2010, 06:08:44 PM
shut up mutant


this is awesome
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 04, 2010, 06:21:01 PM
The clouds are dark...the winds are strong...and my right to sidehug my wife just got revoked

Truly a sad day for Real Married Couples everywhere. When will this tyranny end
Title: Re: Gaypocalypse Now |OT| Gay Marriage Mandatory as of 1 PM PST | Prop 8 Annihilated
Post by: demi on August 04, 2010, 06:26:02 PM
It took one meeting to overturn what Patel donated over $500+ for

Feels a bit silly don't it
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 04, 2010, 06:28:51 PM
Ha, the right attempted to make the judge's homosexuality an issue during the trial. Of course, a straight judge's sexuality wouldn't be an issue right
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 06:30:11 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on August 04, 2010, 06:28:51 PM
Ha, the right attempted to make the judge's homosexuality an issue during the trial. Of course, a straight judge's sexuality wouldn't be an issue right

I read an amazing editorial on FOX News this morning (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/08/04/gerard-bradley-proposition-marriage-sex-california-judge/) about how it's not that he's gay, it's because if gay people can get married, he will get married, and thus get lots of wedding presents, and therefore he has a financial interest in the outcome of the case and should have recused himself. SUPER COOL LOGIC BRO
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 04, 2010, 06:34:17 PM
Quote from: Synthesizer Patel on August 04, 2010, 06:30:11 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on August 04, 2010, 06:28:51 PM
Ha, the right attempted to make the judge's homosexuality an issue during the trial. Of course, a straight judge's sexuality wouldn't be an issue right

I read an amazing editorial on FOX News this morning (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/08/04/gerard-bradley-proposition-marriage-sex-california-judge/) about how it's not that he's gay, it's because if gay people can get married, he will get married, and thus get lots of wedding presents, and therefore he has a financial interest in the outcome of the case and should have recused himself. SUPER COOL LOGIC BRO

Well to be fair, gay guys would do anything for a Sex In the City boxset present
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: tiesto on August 04, 2010, 06:53:55 PM
Gotta celebrate with some Sylvester!

[youtube=560,345]oG2ixYJ79iE[/youtube]
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 04, 2010, 08:07:28 PM
Tiesto, I wanna take you to a (government mandated) gay bar!

[youtube=560,345]HTN6Du3MCgI[/youtube]
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Olivia Wilde Homo on August 04, 2010, 08:41:30 PM
That is good news!

My state has legalized gay marriage (Iowa) and with the possibility of having a Republican governor this year, it will be interesting to see if they will try to re-ban gay marriage.  Stuff like this today is promising for upholding gay marriage, even though it took over a year and a half to reverse it.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Fresh Prince on August 04, 2010, 08:47:57 PM
Hmm but what does this really mean?
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Brehvolution on August 04, 2010, 09:09:04 PM
Sounds like it's time to break out the good stuff.
(http://i38.tinypic.com/b5fepl.jpg)

:rofl @ Fagnarok
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: tiesto on August 04, 2010, 09:12:39 PM
Quote from: Joe Molotov® EDGE™ on August 04, 2010, 08:07:28 PM
Tiesto, I wanna take you to a (government mandated) gay bar!

[youtube=560,345]HTN6Du3MCgI[/youtube]

How is this not the official song of the Bore? (well aside from Outrun 2's "Life Is A Bore" of course)
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: The Fake Shemp on August 04, 2010, 09:18:23 PM
How is it that nobody has made a mock RNC video with Michael Steele and not use that song?
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 04, 2010, 09:37:39 PM
from the ruling
Quote
While proponents vigorously defended the constitutionality of Proposition 8, they did so based on legal conclusions and cross-examinations of some of plaintiffs’ witnesses, eschewing all but a rather limited factual presentation. Proponents argued that Proposition 8 should be evaluated solely by considering its language and its consistency with the “central purpose of marriage, in California and everywhere else, * * * to promote naturally procreative sexual relationships and to channel them into stable, enduring unions for the sake of producing and raising the next generation.” Doc #172-1 at 21. Proponents asserted that marriage for same-sex couples is not implicit in the concept of ordered liberty and thus its denial does not deprive persons seeking such unions of due process. See generally Doc #172-1. Nor, proponents continued, does the exclusion of same-sex couples in California from marriage deny them equal protection because, among other reasons, California affords such couples a separate parallel institution under its domestic partnership statutes. Doc #172-1 at 75 et seq.

Quote
At oral argument on proponents’ motion for summary judgment, the court posed to proponents’ counsel the assumption that “the state’s interest in marriage is procreative” and inquired how permitting same-sex marriage impairs or adversely affects that interest. Doc #228 at 21. Counsel replied that the inquiry was “not the legally relevant question,” id, but when pressed for an answer, counsel replied: “Your honor, my answer is: I don’t know. I don’t know.” Id at 23.

Despite this response, proponents in their trial brief promised to “demonstrate that redefining marriage to encompass same-sex relationships” would effect some twenty-three specific harmful consequences. Doc #295 at 13-14. At trial, however, proponents presented only one witness, David Blankenhorn, to address the government interest in marriage. Blankenhorn’s testimony is addressed at length hereafter; suffice it to say that he provided no credible evidence to support any of the claimed adverse effects proponents promised to demonstrate. During closing arguments, proponents again focused on the contention that “responsible procreation is really at the heart of society’s interest in regulating marriage.” Tr 3038:7-8. When asked to identify the evidence at trial that supported this contention, proponents’ counsel replied, “you don’t have to have evidence of this point.” Tr 3037:25-3040:4.

Holy fuck :rofl

Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Brehvolution on August 04, 2010, 09:55:40 PM
Quote
“you don’t have to have evidence of this point.”

Quote from: Jaydubya
Because it just is
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 04, 2010, 09:57:57 PM
The Supreme Court leans to the right but I honestly can't see that type of piss poor argument winning there either. Good lord

c'mon son
/ed lover
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mr. Gundam on August 04, 2010, 10:11:56 PM
Did anyone else's marriage suddenly implode when the decision was handed down? :lol

Quote from: tiesto on August 04, 2010, 09:12:39 PM
Quote from: Joe Molotov® EDGE™ on August 04, 2010, 08:07:28 PM
Tiesto, I wanna take you to a (government mandated) gay bar!

[youtube=560,345]HTN6Du3MCgI[/youtube]

How is this not the official song of the Bore? (well aside from Outrun 2's "Life Is A Bore" of course)

I kick off every Man Night at my place by singing Gay Bar in Rock Band.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Eric P on August 04, 2010, 10:22:46 PM
i got something to put in you
i got something to put in you
in my basement basement basement

let's go down there
let's all go down there
to my basement basement basement
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: drew on August 04, 2010, 10:26:32 PM
The judge was gay?

Well, that explains that!
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Diunx on August 04, 2010, 10:33:29 PM
Who gives a shit about queers getting married and then divorce in less than a year? I want mah legal pot :drool
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mr. Gundam on August 04, 2010, 10:37:03 PM
Quote from: Diunx on August 04, 2010, 10:33:29 PM
Who gives a shit about queers getting married and then divorce in less than a year? I want mah legal pot :drool

The two pot initiatives in Washington state failed to get enough signatures to make the ballot this year due to the two groups fighting each other and an inability to get enough non-permabaked signature gatherers. One of their ideas was to include a signature page in a local alternative weekly in the hopes that readers would rip it out, have their friends sign it, and then mail it in. I'm sure that worked really well. :lol

Also, the Washington state Democratic party was unwilling to donate any money to either campaign.

Quote from: Eric P on August 04, 2010, 10:22:46 PM
i got something to put in you
i got something to put in you
in my basement basement basement

let's go down there
let's all go down there
to my basement basement basement

The basement isn't done yet. When it is, I'll make sure to christen it with that song.  :-*
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Akala on August 04, 2010, 10:47:31 PM
:rock
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Diunx on August 04, 2010, 10:50:12 PM
Quote from: Akala on August 04, 2010, 10:47:31 PM
:rock

Sinner.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mandark on August 05, 2010, 01:52:27 AM
:bow liberal activist judges :bow2


:bow celebratory gay buttsex :bow2


:piss tyranny of the majority :piss2


:piss bigots and their enablers :piss2
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Cormacaroni on August 05, 2010, 01:55:33 AM
:rock

ok, who wants to get hitched. PM me.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mandark on August 05, 2010, 02:00:56 AM
Hey.  This was in federal court.  And the judge ruled that the law violates the US constitution.

So...
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 05, 2010, 02:15:22 AM
So...
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Cormacaroni on August 05, 2010, 02:20:18 AM
It means 2010-15 will be the War of the Homos. Some will live. Some will die. Many will get rear-hugged.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mr. Gundam on August 05, 2010, 02:30:42 AM
Quote from: Cormacaroni on August 05, 2010, 01:55:33 AM
:rock

ok, who wants to get hitched. PM me.

Check your PMs, you sexy stud.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Dickie Dee on August 05, 2010, 02:32:58 AM
Quote from: Mandark on August 05, 2010, 02:00:56 AM
Hey.  This was in federal court.  And the judge ruled that the law violates the US constitution.

So...

That'd require the rather despicable SCOTUS though, no? Though if these are the clowns that will be arguing it, who knows what will happen.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mandark on August 05, 2010, 02:54:17 AM
Yeah, SCOTUS leaves stuff up in the air, if it gets that far.  I just hadn't been following this suit closely, and didn't realize it would affect the whole country.  IIRC, the Hawaii ruling back in the 90's was based on their state constitution, so didn't apply to other states (at least not after DOMA and didn't that just get knocked down too?).
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: chronovore on August 05, 2010, 09:18:55 AM
Quote from: drew on August 04, 2010, 10:26:32 PM
The judge was gay?

Well, that explains that!
Yeah, next they'll be letting black and Latino judges make calls on equal rights?!
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 05, 2010, 09:24:31 AM
Yea the logic is quite impressive. Maybe Clarence Thomas should recuse himself from civil rights cases.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
that's actually a good idea
[close]
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: AdmiralViscen on August 05, 2010, 11:15:56 AM
Any predictions on how this goes in the Supreme Court? I think not well
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mupepe on August 05, 2010, 11:22:05 AM
I seriously can't see how they can get by legally with arguments and rebuttals like this.  I'm arguing on the corvetteforum and holy shit i'm astounded by the ignorance there.

"BECAUSE GOD CREATED MARRIAGE, NOT THE GOVERNMENT"
"GET RID OF THAT PESKY 14TH AMENDMENT TOO THEN"
"WHAT ABOUT POLYGAMY?  SHOULD THAT BE LEGAL TOO?"
"WHAT ABOUT THE DISCRIMINATION OF THAT CHURCHES THAT DON'T WANT TO MARRY GAYS?"

argh!
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Robo on August 05, 2010, 05:33:56 PM
*counts users browsing this thread*  Hopefully at least four.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Mandark on August 06, 2010, 02:25:14 AM
Quote from: AdmiralViscen on August 05, 2010, 11:15:56 AM
Any predictions on how this goes in the Supreme Court? I think not well

Scalia, Alito, Thomas and Roberts are locks to vote against.  So it probably all comes down to Anthony Kennedy.  Interestingly, the ruling cited Kennedy's opinions (http://www.slate.com/id/2262766) in gay rights rulings 15 times.

It would be pretty terrible to have the supremes overturn it, since that would set a precedent which would set back national gay marriage by years.  That's a big part of why GLAAD, the ACLU and a bunch of similar groups initially opposed the lawsuit.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Dickie Dee on August 06, 2010, 02:35:31 AM
The SCOTUS is pretty free to rule more than what's presented by the parties involved I thought. I'd like to think that even Scalito couldn't defend the Prop-8 "our claims don't require evidence", but they're alot more free to broaden the ruling however they wish aren't they. I haven't seen any analysis on this at all surprisingly - just remembering past cases where they took up cases and greatly broadened the scope of the ruling well beyond the initial appeal.

Basically, they can dress up their rulings as they wish and not be hamstrung by the absurdity of the Prop8 groups legal arguments as some lower courts might. That's my limited understanding, just wish I could read something, anything that might address this.

Edit: Found this (http://www.slate.com/id/2262766/), which makes some of the points you did Mandark. I guess my question is due to my lack of familiarity with SCOTUS procedings, but does the quality of NOM's arguments ultimately matter a lick before the court?
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Tristam on August 06, 2010, 06:22:39 AM
Yeah, this is pretty much the best thread title in the history of Internet forums.
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Dickie Dee on August 06, 2010, 06:24:27 AM
Agreed

Also, as to my previous, ramblin', this was a pretty good read:

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/8/4/gay-marriage-and-the-constitution/judge-walkers-factual-findings (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/8/4/gay-marriage-and-the-constitution/judge-walkers-factual-findings)
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 06, 2010, 01:49:22 PM
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/343140/august-05-2010/how-to-ruin-same-sex-marriages
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Oblivion on August 08, 2010, 03:29:00 AM
Finally, some GOOD arguments to discriminate against the gays:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/#38583339
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 08, 2010, 12:45:03 PM
[youtube=560,345]EJwSprkiInE[/youtube]

Complete and utter annihilation. I want to see this guy go head to head with the chick in the Chris Matthews clip
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 12, 2010, 03:47:52 PM
:rock

also, Glenn Beck supports gay marriage
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/glenn-beck-to-bill-oreilly-gay-marriage-is-not-a-threat-to-the-country-video.php?ref=fpb

religious right getting smacked with ether left and right
Title: Re: Fagnarok Cometh |OT| Prop 8 Annihilated | All side hugs now "from behind" by law
Post by: Saint Cornelius on August 12, 2010, 04:07:35 PM
Quote from: Howard Alan Treesong on August 04, 2010, 04:46:09 PM
I just finished reading the meat of the decision.

 :teehee

Quote from: Diunx on August 04, 2010, 10:33:29 PM
Who gives a shit about queers getting married and then divorce in less than a year? I want mah legal pot :drool

In Cali you can have it all!
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Saint Cornelius on August 12, 2010, 04:29:13 PM
Oh, nevermind. I was confused. Will edit.
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Saint Cornelius on August 12, 2010, 04:30:55 PM
Also, what the hell at the thread title change.
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 12, 2010, 06:03:35 PM
Quote from: Saint Cornelius on August 12, 2010, 04:30:55 PM
Also, what the hell at the thread title change.

it's the fifth title change, the thread title is continually updated to reflect the current status of our New Gay Overlords
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: chronovore on August 12, 2010, 06:12:33 PM
Your ex-spouse from your former straight life gets automatically registered as your new het-pet.
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Van Cruncheon on August 12, 2010, 06:15:57 PM
HET-PET! so awesome. i am totally calling my wife that 4-EVER
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 12, 2010, 06:32:45 PM
Quote from: Genghis Cohen on August 12, 2010, 06:17:58 PM
And with that Prole's sex life slides lower than an Android users.

into the sexless hole where Windows Phone 7 is buried
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Van Cruncheon on August 12, 2010, 06:33:50 PM
oh my god i hate you both :punch

spoiler (click to show/hide)
:'( :'( :'(
[close]
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Akala on August 12, 2010, 07:45:14 PM
 :lol
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: chronovore on August 13, 2010, 01:03:12 AM
Quote from: Van Cruncheon on August 12, 2010, 06:15:57 PM
HET-PET! so awesome. i am totally calling my wife that 4-EVER
I used to hang with a bunch of NoCal lesbians with whom I shared comics and Xena fetishes. They were fond of calling me that. It was either that or "cigarillo hag," but I was pretty sure my XY status prevented that from being applicable.
Title: Re: ARMAGAYDON |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | EB posters to be common-law gay married on 8/18
Post by: Yeti on August 16, 2010, 06:15:01 PM
I believe the preferred nomenclature for a male cigarillo hag is cigarillo stag
Title: Re: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 16, 2010, 09:54:12 PM
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/08/california-marriages-delayed.html

    First, and drastically most importantly, the Court granted the stay. Consequently the thousands of couples who were waiting for the day of equality will have to wait at least a few more months until December.

    Second, the Court wants this case to be resolved quickly. Appellants’ opening brief is due in just a month and the hearing will happen on December 6th. This is lightning quick for a Federal Court of Appeals, and it’s a very good sign. The Court understands that this case is important, and it doesn’t want it to linger.

    Third, the Court specifically orders the Prop 8 proponents to show why this case should not be dismissed for lack of standing. Here’s a discussion of the standing issue. This is very good news for us. It shows that the Court has serious doubts about whether the Appellants have standing. Even better, the Court is expressing an opinion that its inclination is that the case should be dismissed. That being said, the panel that issued this Order (the motions panel) is not the same panel that will hear that case on the merits. The merits panel will be selected shortly before December 6th and we don’t know the three judges who will be on the merits panel. But this is a very good sign that the appeal could be dismissed on the ground of standing alone.
Title: Re: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 16, 2010, 10:30:36 PM
Quote from: Jinfash on August 16, 2010, 09:59:33 PM
On the phone trying to cancel my flight.

we can always just "kill time" until December :-*
Title: Re: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 16, 2010, 11:43:16 PM
Quote from: Howard Alan Treesong on August 16, 2010, 10:30:36 PM
Quote from: Jinfash on August 16, 2010, 09:59:33 PM
On the phone trying to cancel my flight.

we can always just "kill time" until December :-*

Nature will always find a way.  :tauntaun
Title: Re: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Mandark on August 16, 2010, 11:51:07 PM
Okay, who wants to bet that a whole lot of the political-legal punditry who have been in favor of setting a high bar to establish standing (if you don't know the government's been wiretapping you, you don't have the standing as a harmed party to sue them and figure out whether they've been wiretapping you) suddenly make a principled conversion in this case?

I know this is a blanket accusation of future hypocrisy and totally unfair on my part, but whatevs.
Title: Re: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Phoenix Dark on August 17, 2010, 12:49:12 AM
that just went over my head like i dodged a money shot  ???
Title: Re: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on August 17, 2010, 01:08:54 AM
yeah, Mandark, I read a ton of political blogs and even I have no idea what particular sub-conflict you're on about this time
Title: Re: Gaylords Rising |OT| Prop 8 Nixed | Prole's cismarriage saved by God's own stay
Post by: Mandark on August 17, 2010, 01:37:01 AM
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9874526-7.html

ACLU files lawsuit on behalf of people against the government for warrantless wiretapping.  Judge rules that because the ACLU can't name a particular person who was tapped, they don't have standing and throws out the lawsuit.  Which basically creates a catch 22 where no secret surveillance program could ever be legally challenged, cause they won't tell you who's being watched.

The reactions were predictably pro on the right and con on the left, and I'm guessing it'll be reversed here.



Anyways, is it kosher for the CA government not to appeal this?  I know there's some official responsibility for governments to try to fight off legal challenges, to prevent politicians from just dumping the previous administrations' legislation without a vote, they probably get some leeway.  I mean, I like when it's working for the right causes (the Obama administration's been accused of sandbagging its legal defense of DOMA), but I wouldn't want to see President Romney's Justice Department let a bunch of regulatory legislation get struck down without a fight.