US suproremes court supports same sex marriage entitlements....

[Long Duck Dong]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8847643/US-Supreme-Court-backs-gay-rights

In one case, the court invalidated provisions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that has prevented married gay couples from receiving a range of tax, health and retirement benefits that are generally available to married people.The second case was a technical legal ruling that left in place a lower court's ruling striking own California's ban on gay marriage.
It found that the defenders of the ban did not have the right to appeal the decision.
The ruling probably will allow state officials to order the resumption of same-sex unions in about a month.
Obama praised the court's ruling on the federal marriage act, which he said ''was discrimination enshrined in law.''
Obama decided in 2011 to stop defending the 1996 law, concluding that it was legally indefensible

it seems like the fight for same sex marriages, is going to be one of the longest and most dragged out issues in the history of the US, but I have faith in the younger generations that just want to live and do not want a 25 mill page rule book on how they can eat, sleep, shit, breath and fart......as they are most likely the ones that will say that we do not need to march for this, lets just say yes to same sex marriage and get on with life....

hugs the LGBT, its one small step in the fight for equal rights, one giant step further away from the * dark ages * from where people are not allowed to be who they are

[elian]

My state still has a "Marriage Protection Amendment" - we also still had "blue law" codes on the book as late as the 70's that said it was illegal to do a lot of commerce on Sundays so no big surprise there.

I am happy for this decision, the government does not need to dictate who I love. Several of the responses on local news website were positive as well.

I am less happy they overturned key portions of the Voter Rights Act, citing that it now endorses discrimination based on race or some such thing. I would like to think we've come a long way on skin color too but I imagine there are still some places in this country (it is a big country) where being born the "wrong" skin color is a problem.

On a related note I sort of feel sorry for Paula Deen, I mean here is a southern lady being honest about her past and they plowed her under real quick. All I can say is that in this life there are some things I *used* to do that am not proud of and things that I just don't do or say anymore because I now recognize how hurtful they can be. Using the *n* word was never one of them, but still..

[Long Duck Dong]

not sure what blue laws are, I live in a country where its a one law for all.... lol....

the bigger the country, the freer it is in my eyes and that is because the states of the US have the numbers, where as a smaller country like NZ do not and there is a general attitude of what are we going to do ? speak with our vote ? ... it doesn't work that well in NZ, lol.... our prime minister can serve as many terms as they get elected for, there is no two term limit and even if their party is not elected in with a majority, our voting system is set up so that a minority party can still get in and rule as a majority party......

while most states not having same sex marriage can be seen as a sign that the US is not a free country,... the fact is that more and more countries are feeling the pressure to * conform * to PC rules.... and paula deen is a prime example of how the * PC crew * is starting to * cleanse * the country of those that are not part of the * superior race *...... where have we seen that before....

viva la USA, where freedom ( no matter how unsavory it is by way of law and legal law ) is still not being suffocated by the strangle grip of PC and we are not yet targeted by the same people that we once called friend and fellow protestor.....

[darkeyes]

I think Blue laws are state religious observance enforcement laws.. like keeping pubs closed and not selling alcohol on Sunday, restricting shop opening etc.. we have a little of that in local by-laws in for instance some of the Hebridean Islands.. dying out thank God... I think ferries even run to Lewis nowadays on a Sunday... shocking...

..as to the rest.. pulleeeeeze, Duckie.. pass me a sick bag:eek2:...

[Long Duck Dong]

sure, fran, take all the sick bags you want...... I mean what I say.... I apply the same thinking to the fact that NZ has the civil union ( open to all people and as a alternative to religion based marriage ) and marriage ( open to all but based on the one man / one woman, you surrender yourself to the other person, type marriage )... freedom of choice for all people instead of limiting it to one choice for all people......

you sure you do not want more sick bags, the idea of people having a choice is making you look very green indeed

[darkeyes]

Doesn't make me look in least green, Duckie.. am as pleased as ne 1 'bout the Supreme Court ruling, but it doesn't end there does it?

... the US is as hamstrung with inequalities and inequality tends to restrict choice, as any other developed so called democracy... as overloaded with as much abuse of its citizenry as any, has as much privilege, greed and oppression and more poverty than most... as much paranoia as Ed Snowden has exposed, although we had an idea about much of that.. yea, sure it believes in freedom.. for some, a very few of it's own.. not all.. and even less for those who are not of it's own either for that matter.. not unless like successive British governments u are up the arse of whoever is in power in the US 99% of the time to live off their scraps.. sycophancy is not a very pretty sight from wherever it comes... government or individual.. especially when the dross they, government or individual, roll out is full of half truths and untruths...

US citizens are no more or less free than anywhere else overall.. I wish their much trumpeted liberty was a reality for then maybe it could be the beacon American jingoism keeps telling us it is... the fact is, it is only a beacon of liberty when it suits those who run the place.. that beacon has been long dimmed and it's reputation tarnished by the hypocrisy and overbearing bullying of those political and economic masters who are determined that the US on their behalf for their betterment and their betterment alone, have a God given right to run the world on their terms, for their benefit... the rest of us inside and outside of the US don't even get scraps.. we may if we are lucky get a crumb or 2...

Ur right.. I will prob need a load of sick bags... quite probably enuff 2 last me a lifetime...

[Long Duck Dong]

yeah... got it... US is actually the lost city of Atlantis... obama hates lil green men.... the US cows are closet aliens from out of space..... maximum security prison is another name for sunday school where the pastors teach with AK 47s and flame throwers etc etc etc

they still have the ability and choice to create and push through laws ( including prop 8 ) that would not stand a hope in hell of being done in other countries cos we are more like a PC dictatorship than a democracy........ democracy allows for the passing of laws like prop 8 even if they go against the ideas of good and right, and democracy allows for the overturning and changing of the same laws...

and before other people misread, misquote and misunderstand what I have said.... I support the fight for same sex marriage, LGBT rights etc... but I also support the rights to free speech, expression and the rights of people to make things that I do not agree with, into legal law such as DOMA and prop 8... and I also support the right for those laws to be over turned and replaced by other laws such as the freedom to marry whom we choose without restriction.....

the alternative to our right to vote and support the law changes that we hope to see.... is dictatorships where the people we support, get to make all the laws and we spend the next 30-40 years living under their rule

[tenni]

Whether something is PC or right seems to be a matter of opinion but if you examine the issue and use bars of equality it really is not. It takes thoughtful examination though and that takes time and wisdom. That is why we place some wise thinkers in the role of being on a Supreme Court. The problem is if a society's constitution is not in a position to evaluate equality due to archaic aspects or do they falsely hold to the idea that their constitution is perfect and just? Have wise people evolved and developed the concept of equality and revised their constitution. On the larger issue of such things as same sex marriage, I think that you have to have a bar or guide. That guide has to do in part with equality regardless of gender, sexuality, race, religion, age, mental and physical disability,


Whether a country is free and has the right to call itself that “land of the free” is in need of aspects to determine and evaluate the freedom aspect. It needs levels or bars. On whether some equality aspect is PC and based on a falsehood, the equality issue may be evaluated. There are four dimensions of equality, including substantive equality.


Equality before the law is equality in the administration of justice, where all individuals are subject to the same criminal laws in the same manner by law enforcement and the courts.
Equality under the law is equality in the substance of the law, where the content of the law is equal and fair to everyone so that everyone experiences the same result.
Equal benefit of the law ensures that benefits imposed by law will be proportionate.
Equal protection of the law ensure that the protections imposed by law will be proportionate so that the human dignity of every person is equally safeguarded by the law.

Unlike formal equality, which overlooks personal differences, substantive equality is concerned with the impact of the law on different groups of individuals. Substantive equality requires that there be an equal impact on the person affected by the law.

Religous freedom stops when it become invasive to another person's equality rights. This may be the area that some find difficult. This may be where not having substantive equality makes some feel that it is just being PC. Bigots tend to think this way and use the term PC as if it alone excuses their behaviour (aka possibly Paula Deen but I suspect that her issues are different than these equality issues and same sex marriage). They seem to experience difficulty looking beyond their own rights and wish to impose their view on others without evaluating the four aspects of equality.

Whether one society is freer than another may also be evaluated using these bars and the concept of substantive equality. Some societies are freer than others and it is clear that the US is still struggling at being free on gender and sexuality issues but moving forward in the right direction. Congratulations to the US and particularly the people of California!!! YA!!

I read yesterday that those citizens living along the coast of the USA tend to support same sex marriage equality while those living inside the heartland of the US tend to still oppose perceiving same sex marriage as being equal. There seems to be a split. In order for the numbers to be increasing, I am wondering if it is also possible the that the larger sections of the US population live along the coasts? There seems to be a geographic factor but I and others may be wrong and the stats may be misinterpreted?

[Long Duck Dong]

the canadian charter........ from wikipedia.....

According to the Supreme Court of Canada's Section 15 jurisprudence, the equality guarantees of section 15 are aimed at preventing the "violation of essential human dignity and freedom through the imposition of disadvantage, stereotyping, or political and social prejudices, and to promote a society in which all persons enjoy equal recognition at law as human beings or as members of Canadian society, equally capable and equally deserving of concern, respect and consideration." (Iacobucci J. in Law v. Canada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_v._Canada), [1999])
To that end, the Charter recognizes four dimensions of equality, including substantive equality.


Equality before the law is equality in the administration of justice, where all individuals are subject to the same criminal laws in the same manner by law enforcement and the courts.
Equality under the law is equality in the substance of the law, where the content of the law is equal and fair to everyone so that everyone experiences the same result.
Equal benefit of the law ensures that benefits imposed by law will be proportionate.
Equal protection of the law ensure that the protections imposed by law will be proportionate so that the human dignity of every person is equally safeguarded by the law.

Unlike formal equality, which overlooks personal differences, substantive equality is concerned with the impact of the law on different groups of individuals. Substantive equality requires that there be an equal impact on the person affected by the law.

[tenni]

Yes..wiki. That does not diminish the validity of these factors. I could have just as well gone to the actual charter sections. I'm no lawyer but I have an understanding of that aspect of the Canadian constitution. What does the NZ, British and US constitutions state about substantive equality and these four factors? I believe that the British constitution may have some aspects dealing with substantive equality but none of us are constitutional experts.

The four factors are not in section 15. Here is the actual Charter (I think in its entirety?)

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html
.................................................. ...........

Since the representative from NZ refuses to look "it up" does that lower his credibility to discuss and debate this issue of equality? I'd say yes and that he prefers to be emotive instead.

It is amusing how some people hide under stealth visibility but pounce when it suits them. :)

[Long Duck Dong]

what does the NZ constitution say ??? go google it.... cos NZ sure is not as free and progressive as its made out to be.... the legal laws only make it appear that way in the same way that canada allows same sex marriage, doesn't mean that people are not hiding in the closet and still blaming the society of their free and progressive country....

my opinion was simply a personal observation and pity me for posting it cos I, as well as so many others, know that any attempt to see any aspect of the US in a positive light, will generally result in the same people coming in to rubbish the US.... its like one of the unwritten *laws* of this site and another reason why so many people do not bother trying to post their opinions.....hence the term goon squad...

[tenni]

"in the same way that canada allows same sex marriage, doesn't mean that people are not hiding in the closet and still blaming the society of their free and progressive country."

The attempt to connect same sex marriage rights to personal living choices as to be political is weak at best. To connect/promote freedom but ignore freedom of choice to publicly assemble or not; seems a sad attempt to impose one political group's will over another groups. If a person decides to flit about proclaiming their sexuality as if on a campaign and yet not support freedom of choice is imo to demonstrate support for gay PC behaviour. Discuss the issues and not a person's choice. By so doing so, a person shows where they stand. One may advocate for equality without wearing a gay flag or even a bisexual flag. When you hear a person refer to same sex marriage as gay marriage, speak up as a bisexual and point out to them that a bisexual may have a same sex partner but not be gay. A bisexual may have a cross gender partner and not be hetero straight either. WE are bisexual. WE do not have to adhere to gay political thinking!

[DuckiesDarling]

"in the same way that canada allows same sex marriage, doesn't mean that people are not hiding in the closet and still blaming the society of their free and progressive country."

The attempt to connect same sex marriage rights to personal living choices as to be political is weak at best. To connect freedom and ignore freedom of choice to publicly assemble or not seems a sad attempt to impose one groups will over another groups. If a person decides to flit about proclaiming their sexuality as if on a campaign and yet not support freedom of choice is to show PC behaviour by some so called bisexual advocates who confuse gay advocacy with bisexual advocacy.

hmm to quote you from another thread "Piss off, troll" this has not a thing to do with me.

[darkeyes]

what does the NZ constitution say ??? go google it.... cos NZ sure is not as free and progressive as its made out to be.... the legal laws only make it appear that way in the same way that canada allows same sex marriage, doesn't mean that people are not hiding in the closet and still blaming the society of their free and progressive country....

my opinion was simply a personal observation and pity me for posting it cos I, as well as so many others, know that any attempt to see any aspect of the US in a positive light, will generally result in the same people coming in to rubbish the US.... its like one of the unwritten *laws* of this site and another reason why so many people do not bother trying to post their opinions.....hence the term good squad...
We've been given an upgrade hey? The Good Squad now... think I prefer Goon ta:cutelaugh...

..and it's not a case of rubbishing the US.. it is a case of picking up and commenting upon the what we see or at least I see as the rubbish u posted just as u do to anyone else u feel the same way about.. if we, any of us, believe there is a wrong or a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of reality, should we sit back and stay quiet? Do u? No u bloody well don't and none of us would expect u to.

..and are u saying the Supreme Court decision will stop people living in the closet in that "free and progressive country"? U do talk such tosh at times... have u ever thought, that maybe, as many people don't post because they agree with us as are put off by anything we say? I don't know whether that is the case or not but it doesn't matter.. because it is a free and open forum and u bitching about people who disagree with u wont stop people who have something to say from saying it if that's what they want to do... u are entitled to ur observations.. but so is tenni and I and anyone else who wishes to comment however they think and whatever they have to say..

[tenni]

"hmm to quote you from another thread "Piss off, troll" this has not a thing to do with me."

That is correct unless you plan to marry a same sex person or attempt to pretend to be homoflexible. A troll hides and lurks sticking in an off topic comment as to distract the discussion. Trolls often have multi identities as well posting and supporting what other forms of the troll post. Coming to the defence of that troll clone.

[DuckiesDarling]

"hmm to quote you from another thread "Piss off, troll" this has not a thing to do with me."

That is correct unless you plan to marry a same sex person or attempt to pretend to be homoflexible.

And this is why you are on so many people's ignore list. Have a good day while I go back to making sure I never have to read another thing you type.

[darkeyes]

And this is why you are on so many people's ignore list. Have a good day while I go back to making sure I never have to read another thing you type.
But u will.. b honest...;)

[DuckiesDarling]

But u will.. b honest...;)

nope, not unless people i actually care to read quote him and then i'll just bleach my eyes :)

[Long Duck Dong]

We've been given an upgrade hey? The Good Squad now... think I prefer Goon ta:cutelaugh...

..and it's not a case of rubbishing the US.. it is a case of picking up and commenting upon the what we see or at least I see as the rubbish u posted just as u do to anyone else u feel the same way about.. if we, any of us, believe there is a wrong or a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of reality, should we sit back and stay quiet? Do u? No u bloody well don't and none of us would expect u to.

..and are u saying the Supreme Court decision will stop people living in the closet in that "free and progressive country"? U do talk such tosh at times... have u ever thought, that maybe, as many people don't post because they agree with us as are put off by anything we say? I don't know whether that is the case or not but it dooesn't matter.. because it is a free and open forum and u bitching about people who disagree with u wont stop people who have something to say from saying it if that's what they want to do... u are entitled to ur observations.. but so is tenni and I and anyone else who wishes to comment however they think and whatever they have to say..


I have posted often about how legal laws do not change attitudes as having a opinion is not against the law.. but it gets a lil old with the goon squad rushing straight into threads and telling people that what they post is tosh or rubbish.... even to the point of misreading what they say, in order to call it rubbish..... .

so if you want to call what I am saying, tosh and rubbish, go for it, fran... but for fucks sakes, learn to read correctly what is posted before you call it rubbish cos its not the first time you have misread or misquoted me and others and told us that we are full of tosh.....

the reason why I use the term goon squad, is simple, it refers to people that believe that they are a law unto their selves, anything they say is right and true and if they argue that the sky is pink with yellow polka dots, then tell people how wrong they are for saying the sky is orange cos its a known fact that the sky is bright green and therefore that is proof that the other person is wrong and if you point out that fact that it doesn't make sense, they resort to personal attacks on the person, their partner, their sexuality, their relationship and any other thing that can be rubbished, including personal opinions and understandings even if they have to be misread in order to do it... then call the person a martyr and a victim......

[darkeyes]

I wasn't quoting or misquoting u at all.. I was asking a question utilising words u had used to frame that question which arose from my understanding of just what u did say.....

[Long Duck Dong]

I posted what does the NZ constitution say ??? go google it.... cos NZ sure is not as free and progressive as its made out to be.... the legal laws only make it appear that way in the same way that canada allows same sex marriage, doesn't mean that people are not hiding in the closet and still blaming the society of their free and progressive country....

my opinion was simply a personal observation and pity me for posting it cos I, as well as so many others, know that any attempt to see any aspect of the US in a positive light, will generally result in the same people coming in to rubbish the US.... its like one of the unwritten *laws* of this site and another reason why so many people do not bother trying to post their opinions.....hence the term goon squad...


you asked .and are u saying the Supreme Court decision will stop people living in the closet in that "free and progressive country"? and then said. U do talk such tosh at times...

I was not talking about the supreme court at all... in fact I never mentioned it in my post....my post had not to do with the US, the US supreme court ruling and it actually clearly talks about how laws only make a place appear free and progressive and how the rights to same sex marriage in canada has not changed the fact that people are still closeted and blaming society... a society that is supposedly free and progressive cos of the laws....... in the same way that I stated my own country appears to be free and progressive but its a illusion.... so NO I definitively did not imply, insinuate, try to assume or convey etc any understanding in any form that I believed that the US supreme court ruling was going to change that much in regards to society attitudes.....

the fact that I actually clearly stated that fact, is why I have the impression that you did not bother to read at all as your reaction was based on a mish mash reading of 3-4 of my posts, not one and it makes me wonder if you are drunk, stoned or both.... cos I have asked 3 of my friends to read the thread and they have all questioned how you get the understanding you do, when its clear what I was saying, to whom and in regards to what.....

[tenni]

DD Darling
What have you actually posted on this thread topic?

Your posts are nothing but pure personal attacks in violation of rule 2.

Now, what do you have to say about same sex marriage in California?

What do you have to say about equality and substantive equality and formal equality?

As darkeyes points out to you about your drama over the top behaviour.... you read my posts or you would not be responding to my posts. You have made these statements before.

[Long Duck Dong]

DD Darling
What have you actually posted on this thread topic?

Your posts are nothing but pure personal attacks in violation of rule 2.

Now, what do you have to say about same sex marriage in California?

What do you have to say about equality and substantive equality and formal equality?

As darkeyes points out to you about your drama over the top behaviour.... you read my posts or you would not be responding to my posts. You have made these statements before.

leave my partner alone, please tenni.. she has you on ignore

[darkeyes]

R-reading this chat chat and reading new stuff since I got home, I havent rubbished what u said at all.. I explained to u why I thought u were talking rubbish.. that is not semantics.. and neither do I believe the "Goon Squad"( a pretty personal remark if I may say so...) have rubbished what u said either for mostly they do quite the same thing.. I also deny that I have become personal with u.. none of this is out of personal antipathy or is meant personally... others will speak for themselves, should they so wish....

..and was it tenni who raised ur partner?I'm not sure about that at all... in any case, she had a go at him, and now telling (ok.. asking..)him to leave her alone is a bit rich.. whether she has him on ignore or not is immaterial.. he has the right to reply to anything anyone says just as u have... now.. its time for me tea...:bigrin:

[tenni]

ah darkeyes
Face it we have a couple of drama fanatics playing tag team personal attacks.
I just reviewed what was written as well.

1/ post 12 by me is quoted by DD in post 13. She can only get that information by actually reading my post 12. No one quoted my post 12.

2/ In post 16 DD quotes my post 15..no one copied my words inbetween post 15 & 16 and so she needed to read what I posted. If she had me on ignore and kept it that way, she could not read my posts.

3/ In post 23 LDD asks me to leave her alone as his “partner” has me on ignore.....nope dude..she is reading in stealth mode. ;)


Such sophmoric emotive, trollish off topic postings seems un necessary.

Now back to something closer to the thread topic.

"it seems like the fight for same sex marriages, is going to be one of the longest and most dragged out issues in the history of the US"

How many years have same sex marriage advocates in California state that they have been trying to get equality?

[justcurious4me]

I gotta say this for certain... It's about damn time they shot DOMA down... If there was ever an act in our lifetime that screamed segregation, this was it!!! Congrats to all of those who have/had courage to stand up and do what is/was right! Finally, something that didn't get screwed up in Washington!!

[void()]

Whether a country is free and has the right to call itself that “land of the free” is in need of aspects to determine and evaluate the freedom aspect. It needs levels or bars. On whether some equality aspect is PC and based on a falsehood, the equality issue may be evaluated. There are four dimensions of equality, including substantive equality.



Equality before the law is equality in the administration of justice, where all individuals are subject to the same criminal laws in the same manner by law enforcement and the courts.
Equality under the law is equality in the substance of the law, where the content of the law is equal and fair to everyone so that everyone experiences the same result.
Equal benefit of the law ensures that benefits imposed by law will be proportionate.
Equal protection of the law ensure that the protections imposed by law will be proportionate so that the human dignity of every person is equally safeguarded by the law.



Unfortunately, we seem not to have any such equality in America. I
think it telling former POTUS Clinton signed DOMA into law, now, he
gives accolades to SCOTUS for rescinding it.

If one is opulent, one may live above the law. This is apparent in our
current POTUS telling congress he does not need them in order to
declare war, merely a nod from the United Nations. He also violates
his own law in that he aids known terrorist in Al-Qaeda against the
NDAA, which dons such actions as acts of treason.

So, we do not have that equality of which you speak.

[Long Duck Dong]

R-reading this chat chat and reading new stuff since I got home, I havent rubbished what u said at all.. I explained to u why I thought u were talking rubbish.. that is not semantics.. and neither do I believe the "Goon Squad"( a pretty personal remark if I may say so...) have rubbished what u said either for mostly they do quite the same thing.. I also deny that I have become personal with u.. none of this is out of personal antipathy or is meant personally... others will speak for themselves, should they so wish....

..and was it tenni who raised ur partner?I'm not sure about that at all... in any case, she had a go at him, and now telling (ok.. asking..)him to leave her alone is a bit rich.. whether she has him on ignore or not is immaterial.. he has the right to reply to anything anyone says just as u have... now.. its time for me tea...:bigrin:

fran, tenni edited out the part when he accused her of pretty much lying about her sexuality ( its what she reacted to ) ..... and the other part where he implied that I am saying what I am about the US cos I have a fiancee there and I should look at moving there or are the entry laws preventing it....

if he wants to talk about personal attacks, he needs to think about what he posted and edited cos DD, I and others saw what he posted and edited out....... tenni has a history of editing personal attack posts, it is not the first time he has been seen doing it and called out on it by other members, hes been banned in the past for his personal attacks on me and DD even tho he edited the posts to cover his asss

[Long Duck Dong]

Unfortunately, we seem not to have any such equality in America. I
think it telling former POTUS Clinton signed DOMA into law, now, he
gives accolades to SCOTUS for rescinding it.

If one is opulent, one may live above the law. This is apparent in our
current POTUS telling congress he does not need them in order to
declare war, merely a nod from the United Nations. He also violates
his own law in that he aids known terrorist in Al-Qaeda against the
NDAA, which dons such actions as acts of treason.

So, we do not have that equality of which you speak.

nods void, that is why I refer to the freedom in the US, as its that freedom that allows clinton to do such a thing..... where people get confused is that they mistake freedom for equality and use that as a rule of thumb for measuring freedom....

paula deen is being nailed for a * offense* 20 years ago, while rap artists use the N word in their songs... its considered acceptable to say that as a person of color but not a white person... the same as in NZ... but in NZ, try putting out a song using the N word and you will be drawn and quartered for being racial offensive and disrespect of people of color in NZ..... even tho the term doesn't refer to NZ maori... so * freedom * as its known in the us, does not exist here....

its reflected in the same way that its acceptable to target smokers with taxes and other forms of oppressive laws, even to the point of using disgusting images on cig packs, but put up a image showing the aftermath of a car accident caused by drink driving and you want immediately have people all up in arms about how offensive it is and how its a image intended to cause a reaction....... so the freedom to express a opinion or show a reality of life, is seriously curtailing in the interests of PC behievour
any attempt to pass laws that affect drinking ( including tax increases to cover the cost of drink related issues ) is met with immediate opposition cos it would affect the * popular vote and cost jobs in parliament

its not a case of what I think is right, correct or anything else.... I know that votes and laws in NZ will favour the group that can ensure bums in seats in parliament and if NZ had the numbers, DOMA would have been a reality here too.... and that is where I see the aspect of freedom in the US, there is the voter number and the freedom to create laws like DOMA ( and again I do not agree with DOMA )....

[tenni]

"I have posted often about how legal laws do not change attitudes as having a opinion is not against the law."

In Canada since same sex marriage became legal attitudes of Canadians have grown much more accepting and the vast majority accept the right that same sex marriages are just.

In California attitudes have changed to be more positive since prop 8. This discusses the change in attitude in California.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/Shows/Shows/The+National/World/ID/2359266345/

[12voltman59]

Ya pretty well got it right about US blue laws Frannie---about the only stores that were open on Sundays in the past---were drug stores and restaurants--but no booze, beer or wine was served.

I do remember when I was a kid----that in Ohio---an eating place that had a bar could be open on Sundays and serve serve beer---but it had to be "3.2 beer" or beer with an alcohol content of no more than 3.2 percent---which was pretty much swill. Some places did do the thing that you'd bring in your own booze or wine---in a brown paper bag--then they would charge you a "pouring fee" so you could have your cocktails with your Sunday dinner.

Other than maybe a few other "vital" businesses---everything was pretty much closed---and of course----the day that everything was closed was Sunday--the common Christian sabbath--so much for the US having a clear break between religion and government.

Now--we have these tea bagger types----who say things like "America has natural law (or "God's Law) but we have gotten away from that and surely need to get back to it if we are to have any hope God will continue to favor this nation!"

There is this one guy who is a lawyer--- currently the state attorney general in Virginia (a state's top law enforcement official and usually an attorney), who was a prosecutor and is now running for governor of that state---says just this sort of thing!!! The man needs to go back to his days taking pre-law to reacquaint himself with the US legal system----we do not have "natural law" in this country--nor does any nation on Earth---we all have laws crafted by the "hand of man"--not "god."


All I can say to that sort of thinking----"May God help us!!" :yikes2:

[darkeyes]

Have come across unlicensed places that will charge a "corkage" fee wer u bring ur bottle and they cork it forya.. and a few more wich will cork it for nowt.. they r just happy of the custom and it's a selling point.. never come across it in what we call Sunday dry areas tho.. partly cos there are hardly any left.. one or 2 of the Hebrides and a little bit of West Wales I think is all that's left...

I go bit farther than u tho Voltie as u kno.. isn't just laws that r man made.. in me own humble opinion.. so is God.. but ther ya r.. we all believe wot we believe...

... but I do think what has occured in the US this week is incredibly important... I kno I harp on ver often bout the US and the bad things bout it and its Government... but for gud or ill.. and wether things r gud or bad, this week will in time make it easier for other places in the developed world at least.. cos ver often, what the US does 2 day they do tomoz.. peeps r still massively influenced by many events and attitudes in the US.. and for that reason it is important for those of us outside of the US too... and will I am sure make it easier for those of us outside to move rights for the lgbt on...

[void()]

Now--we have these tea bagger types----who say things like "America has natural law (or "God's Law) but we have gotten away from that and surely need to get back to it if we are to have any hope God will continue to favor this nation!"

There is this one guy who is a lawyer--- currently the state attorney general in Virginia (a state's top law enforcement official and usually an attorney), who was a prosecutor and is now running for governor of that state---says just this sort of thing!!! The man needs to go back to his days taking pre-law to reacquaint himself with the US legal system----we do not have "natural law" in this country--nor does any nation on Earth---we all have laws crafted by the "hand of man"--not "god."


We did have at one time what is referred to as "natural" or "organic"
law. It is also better known as Common Law. Common Law is rather
simple.

1. Do not kill or maim others in any way.
2. Do not steal or damage the property of others.
3. Practice no deception in order to defraud others.

That's the whole of Common Law. It was used in America during the time
between drawing up The Articles of Confederation and later The
Constitution of states united in a congress for America. Notice two
things about how I've written here regarding the constitution.

1. America is mixed case, not all capitals like UNITED STATES.
2. The article for is used instead of the article of.

These are important distinctions, not as trivial as some may consider.
Putting UNITED STATES in all capital letters infers the corporate
Federal government which has jurisdiction only with that ten mile
radius of The District Of Columbia. They have intimidated the rest of
us into thinking their jurisdiction covers the whole, for America.

This was done via installing a fiat currency now backed by oil. they
took our gold. An agreement was in place where America would only
create the amount of paper dollars equal to the gold it had. This was
called The Bretton Woods System of currency.

The UNITED STATES broke away from Bretton Woods though, and like the
opulent and immoral bankers created more money than having gold to
back. The UNITED STATES created this money in order to purchase more
oil, the worthless paper being traded for oil and promises to reinvest
in the UNITED STATES. That is how we swindled the Arabian countries
out of a resource and came to based our dollar on oil.

This is also why we attacked Lybia. Lybia was not using the UNITED
STATES dollar. They were becoming the second wealthiest nation on
Earth too. Free education was available to all as mandated by their
leadership. Free health care paid for by the government was offered.

Lybia also brokered a deal between China and Africa. Africa wants to
unite and become an independent power of its own right. It needed a
reliable means of communication to do so. The leader of Lybia bought
all the telecommunications equipment, out of his own pocket. He helped
pay for a rocket launch sponsored by China to get a satellite payload
into space.

Africa would have also established their own central banks using their
own currency, not that of the IMF, or the dollar of the UNITED STATES.
This would give Africa a means to grow its own wealth, the same as
Lybia had done. They would have of course refunded Lybia upon becoming
stable.

Imagine what happens if Africa unites. This tends to scare a lot of
higher up leaders. One major issue I see it rectifying would be a
total abolishing of African slavery for the Free Trade market. The
Free Trade market was originally a British idea. It got Lincoln killed
because he opposed the British trading cotton textiles to China for
opium to trade with India for tea and spices, all on the backs of
slaves.

And yes, that was originally what Free Trade was about. It was what
the big row over groups like The West/East India Trading Company, The
Virginia Company were about. These were merchant class sailors and
ships whom grew wealthy upon Free Trade, while drawing much more
wealth for British lords of the land.

All of what I write herein, you may look up. It is factual and point
of historic record. Also to really pique interest, eugenics was not
merely practiced in Germany. It was practiced in America up into the
early 1960's at least. It began in New Jersey, with forced
sterilization of mentally ill and deficient people. Look up the
history of Planned Parenting and you'll see it is not quite as
benevolent as portrayed.

So, yes. We did have Common Law once. We have gotten away from it as
the banking elite have steered us to be under the Law of Admiralty,
which is the law of commerce upon the seas. It is much akin to British
parliamentary law, hence we have lawyers taking the BAR, British
Academical Research exams. They are still studying the affect of
divide and conquer it would seem.

The law metered as Admiralty law is also know as Corporate law, or
contract law. Under it corporations are legally beholden to rake in
money regardless of the cost. This means if they destroy the
environment, but make millions, they are still operating legally.

This draws us to say actions may be legal, but not lawful. Lawful
means it adheres to Common Law, which was once known as The Law of the
Forest in Brittany, it later ratified as the Magna Carta. The Magna
Carta was later formed into the organic law of the Free Men on the
land. This then became part of America's Articles of Confederation.

I am not saying you need to believe any of this. Please, go look it up
for yourself. I began to become ill from researching it all. Truly the
context and subject matter is a bit repugnant. Excuse me, have written
too much on it now.