Has anyone seen this stupid shit “decision” by the 6th circuit judges?!
Seriously: WHAT THE FUCK!?
I mean it’s bad enough when we have elected officials saying things like this isn’t the business of lawyers and courts, but when judges (generally lawyers themselves) are saying this kind of stupidity?! Look, it’s simple, the point of the courts, and the reason why those states where judges are elected like a politician are a Bad Idea of the most extreme sort, judges selected for political stances, etc. is to have a body whose entire job is to examine the constitutional validity of the laws passed by the other two branches. It does, by the way, include the very real responsibility to step in and declare a law unconstitutional without lawsuits bringing it to their attention, but the courts have rarely exercised this particular power.
Honestly, I could see a point in those who would argue that “marriage” is defined thus, if there was some other legal term for a same-sex pairing that carried with it the exact same legal status making the detail a matter of semantics … this, apparently, is a stance used in some other countries to keep marriage as a religious distinction and this same civil partnership is what opposite-sex couples get if they don’t get married through the churches … or something like that, I did get a little lost reading about it.
However, this isn’t the case. Even states that have civil unions and the like frequently don’t carry with it the same legal protections of marriage where inheritance, visitation rights in emergency hospital situations, child adoption/guardianship/parenthood concerns, authority to make life-support decisions, etc. and besides that, many states don’t even carry that protection. So, by the amendments adopted during/after the civil war which carried the requirement that the law be extended equally to all citizens … ta-da! “The Fourteenth Amendment exists, your argument is invalid”.
“In the main, the majority treats both the issues and the litigants here as mere abstractions,” she wrote. “Instead of recognizing the plaintiffs as persons, suffering actual harm as a result of being denied the right to marry where they reside or the right to have their valid marriages recognized there, my colleagues view the plaintiffs as social activists who have somehow stumbled into federal court, inadvisably, when they should be out campaigning to win ‘the hearts and minds’ of Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee voters to their cause.”
That’s the biggest divide between the two sides on same-sex marriage: is it an issue, or is it about people?
She specifically talks in detail about the Michigan plaintiffs, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, a lesbian couple who have been together for eight years and are raising three children, two of whom are now categorized as having “special needs.” Each of the children is only legally adopted by either DeBoer and Rowse, because Michigan prevents them from co-adopting as a same-sex couple. Daughtrey said she’d have no problem upholding the district court ruling in their favor, noting that “the State of Michigan allows heterosexual couples to marry even if the couple does not wish to have children, even if the couple does not have sufficient resources or education to care for children, even if the parents are pedophiles or child abusers, and even if the parents are drug addicts.”
Bravo! See, like I said, she’s got some brains, this one.
The other two can fuck off the retarded prats.
Oh, no, I’m not in the mood to be nice. The stupidity displayed yesterday by those two morons was unbelievable. I mean, really, you just want to slap them across the face with a two-by-four in hopes it’d knock some sense into them.
I’m not obligated to be nice, or civil about this. I’m pissed off and really wishing I could move to a civilised country – somewhere Scandinavian would be nice.