Gov. Jerry Brown Works Toward Cultural Acceptance Of Gay Marriage In California
[guest post by Dana]
Because gender-specific language in progressive California is so yesterday, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a measure to amend California’s marriage law by replacing language that defines marriage as “between a man and a woman.” Senate Bill 1306 is now gender-neutral as the antiquated, gender-biased terms of “husband” and “wife”, which do not reflect same-sex marriage, have been replaced with the all-inclusive “spouse”:
Under existing law, a reference to “husband” and “wife,” “spouses,” or “married persons,” or a comparable term, includes persons who are lawfully married to each other and persons who were previously lawfully married to each other, as is appropriate under the circumstances of the particular case.
The bill would delete references to “husband” or “wife” in the Family Code and would instead refer to a “spouse,” and would make other related changes.
Sponsor of the legislation, Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco – like I even needed to add this…) responded to the passage of the bill:
“I am pleased Governor Brown has recognized the importance of this bill, which makes it explicitly clear in state law that every loving couple has the right to marry in California,” Leno said in a statement.
“This legislation removes outdated and biased language from state codes and recognizes all married spouses equally, regardless of their gender.”
With this update, nobody’s feelings are hurt, and hip California avoids appearing like a bigoted old fuddy-duddy. Win-win.
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (86e864) — 7/11/2015 @ 3:45 pmThank God the CA legislature is spending time on these matters of grave import rather than talking about superficial stuff like water policy and sanctuary cities.
JVW (8278a3) — 7/11/2015 @ 4:25 pmIs joke, yes? Not post. California.
novada kraslava, latvian ssr (dbc370) — 7/11/2015 @ 4:26 pmJust think: if it had been Adam and Evan instead of Adam and Eve, none of us would be here.
navyvet (c33501) — 7/11/2015 @ 4:34 pmJVW,
You know California’s legislature can’t fix jack, especially big vexing problems like sanctuary cities or the drought because that would mean admitting that their policies have gotten us into this mess in the first place and/or caused a natural occurrence to become far more serious and long lasting. Thus they focus a on something they can tweak and make it appear like they have actually accomplished something great and wonderful for the state. Look at us fix things and advance the state!
Dana (86e864) — 7/11/2015 @ 4:35 pmNew Headline: “California goes bananas. Women and children most affected.”
Mike K (90dfdc) — 7/11/2015 @ 4:50 pmCalifornia, the Fruits and Flakes state. Is anything they do, no matter how absurd, a surprise anymore?
Mark Johnson (a64489) — 7/11/2015 @ 5:01 pmI’ve been reading that some people think this will all go smoothly and predictably, with the refuseniks consigned neatly to the trash cans of history.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/11/2015 @ 5:23 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/07/09/the-libertarian-party-is-supporting-a-brothel-owner-and-yes-it-supports-legal-prostitution/
As long as were going to bring the crazy on, h3lls yeah. Cut the college administrations and the rape performance artists out of the deal entirely.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/11/2015 @ 5:36 pmThe US Navy. Like grad school but with hookers. Offering advanced degrees in urban renewal and governmental restructuring.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/11/2015 @ 5:38 pmgay men and lesbians often refer to their spouse as ‘husband’ or
el polacko (cb3bca) — 7/11/2015 @ 5:59 pm‘wife’ so i don’t think that anyone finds the terms offensive but
then again a spouse is a spouse is a spouse so it does make sense
to use the one simple and clear term in legal documents.
What is wrong with being a bigot?
Michael Ejercito (d9a893) — 7/11/2015 @ 6:07 pmThe sophists and serial trolls have crawled out from under their rocks recently.
JD (3b5483) — 7/11/2015 @ 6:16 pmNo, in CA we say “to the recycle bins of history”!
And how about “comrade” to enforce gender equality?
Patricia (5fc097) — 7/11/2015 @ 6:23 pmspouse is an ugly and ungainly word what’s wrong with mate
nothing
californians are just stupid whores with no sense of poetry
happyfeet (831175) — 7/11/2015 @ 6:31 pm“married spouses”
how stupid do you have to be not to realize this is redundant?
California stupid that’s how stupid
happyfeet (831175) — 7/11/2015 @ 6:37 pmI predicted this very thing would occur right here and not long ago! It’s what they have been doing for years in England. They all say partner.
Gazzer (ee3742) — 7/11/2015 @ 6:44 pmTaking the long view, the more Californians like Moonbeam we have, the fewer Californians we will have.
nk (dbc370) — 7/11/2015 @ 7:11 pmStrike that. They’re already importing them from Mexico.
nk (dbc370) — 7/11/2015 @ 7:12 pmThe left has always been combating Jahiliyyah. Let slip the dogs of war. See how it goes.
These things have a way of getting out of hand.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/11/2015 @ 7:33 pmThe California Constitution says that a law (or provision of the Constitution) that was created by the initiative process cannot be changed by the legislature alone. Any such change must be ratified by a vote of the people (since the original initiative process was an act by the people to bypass the legislature).
As an appalled Californian, I wonder if the idiots in state government are going to just ignore the people’s vote requirement, or whether the citizenry have become so dumb they will gladly approve the changes.
Ken in Camarillo (061845) — 7/11/2015 @ 9:46 pmKen in Camarillo- 7/11 9:46 pm
Yes.
Also, yes.
{{ I really do not recognize my country any more … where did the sane people go? Where did all these “pod people” come from? }}
A_Nonny_Mouse (6b0e63) — 7/11/2015 @ 10:28 pmNOTE: These same people also defend illegal immigration. This should inform you of whether or not same-sex “marriage: is appropriate public policy.
Michael Ejercito (d9a893) — 7/11/2015 @ 10:40 pmActually even if it had been Adam and Eve we wouldnt be here. Starting with just 2 members of a species and trying to populate the planet doesnt work because of inbreeding / lack of genetic variation. This is well studied and documented. In fact minimum viable population for various species is estimated frequently. Hell even a crappy source like Wikipedia has information on this subject.
But lets go ahead and ignore the science. We have a book that tells us how it really works.
Gil (febf10) — 7/11/2015 @ 10:47 pm-Gil
But lets go ahead and ignore the science. We have a book that tells us how it really works.
Let’s go ahead and close off our minds to the unknowable workings of God. Science has discovered the answer to everything, right?
(Pro tip: you don’t have to sign your comments. Your name appears in the time stamp below.)
JVW (8278a3) — 7/11/2015 @ 10:53 pmInbreeding is only a problem when you have defective genes. When you start out with perfect genes, with no bad traits hiding in recessive genes, then inbreeding is 100% safe. It stands to reason that God would start people off with genes that were perfectly adapted to the environment He put them in, and all the defective genes now in our genome are the results of subsequent mutations.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/11/2015 @ 11:14 pmJust so I know where the Christians are coming from on this issue, are you the kind of Christians who follow ALL the teachings of the bible, or only the ones that are currently fashionable in your specific denomination/family unit/local culture?
I just want to know.
Mr Black (f1b3a7) — 7/11/2015 @ 11:35 pmWell, except maybe the feelings of the 52%+ of the voters who voted for Prop 8 a few years ago, but 52% is just an inconsequential minority. Heck, they probably aren’t even people in the eyes of Governor Moonbeam.
max (4fdf98) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:35 amBTW thanks for reminding me about Hollingsworth (the USSC case about prop 8), in light of the Arizona Redistricting Commission ruling last term the USSC got that one wrong, the proponents of Prop 8 as part of the California “legislature” should have had standing to sue. I wonder if it would be worthwhile to refile the suit under the new legislature doesn’t mean legislature doctrine.
max (4fdf98) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:44 amhttp://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/obamas_killing_the_left_lets_help_him.html
mg (31009b) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:51 amGil – you are an effin broken record. We get it, really. You need not continue to prove that you are an asshat. We have grown to accept it.
Mr Black is a “special” drive-by
JD (3b5483) — 7/12/2015 @ 3:08 amThese matters are of grave import. This is why the left beat you into submission. To abdicate the field so that only they get to dictate the morality that is imposed on society.
It’s a corollary to how you must not only be reeducated. You must make a public spectacle of your gratitude for your reeducation. So, not only must you abandon the field and let the left run riot you must pretend it’s not important.
Good boy.
Now you are reduced to arguing that you are the most efficient administrator of the left’s objectives. You have no alternative of your own.
Heaven forbid you force your morality on anyone. Leave that entirely to the left.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 4:51 amKali could not dictate that you get a light rail system from nowhere to nowhere while while the delta smelt get water and farmers do not without first imposing a moral hierarchy.
Does nobody besides me understand that?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 4:56 amYou are not a fiscal conservative unless you are a social conservative. To say otherwise is to hand Bernie Sanders control over the spigot of spending. We, the fiscal conservatives, just want to make sure we’re spending the money efficiently.
What should we be spending the money on?
The moral imperatives of the socialists. To do anything else would be to violate the separation of church and state.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 5:07 amI do Steve57. And like you I resent it and fight it everywhere I can.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/12/2015 @ 5:16 amFunny how that works, isn’t it? Conservatives need to realize that for the secular left the church is the state.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/12/2015 @ 5:20 amI woke up before dawn and I looked at the Moon and the stars, and I reacted, “Aah.”
Sure enough:
I had seen that sky before. Soon, doves. Then ducks.
I will see Orion shortly.
The point being is I’ve been a hunter, close to the land, all my life. I can not explain what I see around me to the satisfaction of astronomers. There are only a few constellations that I can identify. I know the patterns when I see them.
So I knew it was archery season in the A zone in kali. I don’t have a name for how the sky looks for each season. I just know what it does.
There is something that existed before progressive government. I intend not to go down easily.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 6:00 amGil,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/12/2015 @ 6:05 amIf it takes more than a single pair of creatures (“higher” creatures, anyway) to build a population, how did any advanced life form come to exist? Was the neo-Darwinian process so amazing that there were multiple occurrences of the same random mutations at the same time in the same very limited geographical location so they could find each other to produce the next generation?
Don’t be silly, MD in Philly. In the world of no God the government supplied the “mutations” with Obamacars to drive around and find each other.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/12/2015 @ 6:42 amDeucalion and Pyrrha threw rocks over their shoulders.
nk (dbc370) — 7/12/2015 @ 7:16 amI think I’ll stop using the term “My Aunt Fanny”. No need to unduly disturb all the new “spouses” in California.
Comanche Voter (1d5c8b) — 7/12/2015 @ 7:21 amCount me among the people left wondering how life got to be so surreal, so quickly in America…what was good is now thought bad, laws are broken with impunity by those who govern us, biology and Natural Law are disregarded by those who rail about the importance of “settled science”, common sense grows more uncommon daily. Many of the millennial generation live lives that would shame a Roman bacchanalian.
We – as a whole – are no longer a nation of God-fearing people. The Great Unraveling of American Society continues apace.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/12/2015 @ 7:48 amColonel Haiku, it’s almost as if the entire country is going completely insane. And its rapidly accelerating. I am completely convinced there is subculture successfully trying to make Christianity and perhaps Judaism illegal. People perhaps like Gil who are s full of hate and so bitter about God and Christ the mere fact that someone else would believe in Him infuriates the poor guy.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/12/2015 @ 8:00 amThe proponents are not the people; they have no more standing than any individual legislator does (and it’s well-established that legislators have no standing at all).
It’s now moot. The court has already ruled that the 14th amendment has always required states to allow same-sex marriage, so it doesn’t matter what the state constitution says.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 8:04 amOne of my two sons is an optician who works for a hospital in the state’s university system. He tells me I would not believe how often he has adult men and women covered by Medi-Cal who come in to be fitted with glasses and who are unable to come up with the $20 required to cover the out-of-pocket expense to complete the transaction. MediCal will no longer cover the entire cost for those 21 years of age or older. He says that he can see by their prescriptions that many of these folks can’t see anything clearly that’s 5 feet in front of them without corrective lenses. He says a depressingly high number of them – when advised that they need to come up with the scratch or they won’t get their glasses – become outraged and respond with epithets and things like “what… so I’m not supposed to be able to see!?!?” Many of them will pull out their cell phones and start texting their outrage.
We have so many among us who have an expectation that others should be footing “the bill”.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/12/2015 @ 8:08 amAll too true, Hoagie.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/12/2015 @ 8:10 amWhen states start fleeing the union, some of us will survive, Col.
mg (31009b) — 7/12/2015 @ 8:49 amMany of them will pull out their cell phones and start texting their outrage.
Nice iPhones too, no doubt.
Self-entitled, oddly graspy, unbalanced spending priorities (strangely both a spendthrift and cheapskate—like Greek socialists or blue-state Americans), happily dependent on the system.
I wonder if a survey of the political/ideological leanings of a good majority of them would reveal they were, well, devoted liberals, fervent Democrats?
Is the sun hot?
Mark (aa035f) — 7/12/2015 @ 8:54 amThis is the state that forced the city of Pomona (named after the Roman goddess of fruits and nuts) to remove a cross from their city emblem. Because church/state!
mojo (a3d457) — 7/12/2015 @ 10:04 amAnd the ratchet clicks on.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 7/12/2015 @ 10:08 amAnd so?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 10:21 ami don’t really see the big deal if California changes their forms to say spouse instead of wife or husband
this do not change the price of my peabnut bubber
yes yes yes the sun is hot
but give these forms no second thought
the sun fades quick come end of day
but married gays are here to stay
unless President Trump decides otherwise anyways
happyfeet (831175) — 7/12/2015 @ 10:31 amChanging state forms = cultural acceptance.
Any one of you among the conquered peoples of the SCOTUS besides me see a problem with this line of thinking?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 10:34 amAnd that’s the whole point, Steve57. A point wasted on people who can’t see all these little cultural and social manipulations for what they are: small drops in a sea of change. Change can be good but change that throws out the good is evil. When “the Law” allows for killing babes in the name of choice and raises perversion to normal the law ceases to be good and has turned evil. When the law forces Christians (or anybody) to perform work against their will or religion it legalizes slavery and when it fines people for refusing to go against their faith it legalizes bigotry. They are establishing secularism as the State Religion and no one seems to notice.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/12/2015 @ 10:57 amI think they have finally reached the point of overreach, Rev.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/06/the-new-totalitarians-are-here/
They are running out of rope.
I’m not going to help them. Neither are my friends and associates.
I should not speak further.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:20 amWe – as a whole – are no longer a nation of God-fearing people. The Great Unraveling of American Society continues apace.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/12/2015 @ 7:48 am
You answered your own question. Ten would have been enough for S+G, but they couldn’t be found. How many are necessary for the US of A??
Sometimes it seems that God works very slowly; but then when He acts, a whole lot can happen in a moment.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:25 amIt’s now moot. The court has already ruled that the 14th amendment has always required states to allow same-sex marriage
No, the court did not rule that. That’s your textualism dropped on top of the Court’s “evolving standards” logic. The court finds that this has emerged, not that it has always been there. It took society’s “progress” for that to happen.
If the court had ruled that it was always a right, there would be trillions in damages for states to pony up.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:26 amDid you really think the fight ended at gay marriage rights?
There is no end until every traditional institution has been utterly dismantled. Because any remaining vestiges are an unwelcome reminded of God and freedom. None of which are any longer acceptable.
Dana (86e864) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:37 amYou realize that if a future US SC undoes this and declares that the 14th Amendment does not apply to SSM, CA’s Prop 8 would come back into force and all these changes would be reversed.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:46 amKevin M,
That’s a mighty big “if”…
Dana (86e864) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:49 amdid you do the right link at 58
i’m confuzzled
happyfeet (831175) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:52 amOops. Here is the correct link.
Dana (86e864) — 7/12/2015 @ 11:55 amthat’s so cool how they’re closing the doors
The next big battle for the gay and the lesbian peoples will be to figure out how to reclaim their political and social groups and their social identity from the nasty smelly trannies who keep trying to hijack it for to advance their sick tranny agenda.
Good luck with that kiddos.
happyfeet (831175) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:05 pmDana, it’s a near impossibility, no matter what. You would have to be pretty heartless, 5 years on, to disrupt people’s lives to that extent. It’s a [badly] done deal. The whole process, from Prop 8 in the trial court to the SC decision, has been BS on stilts. But all we can really do is limit the damage.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:12 pmYou would have to be pretty heartless, 5 years on, to disrupt people’s lives to that extent.
I dunno, let’s ask the bakers of this world what they think about it. Turnabout is fair play. They opened this can of whoopass.
Gazzer (ee3742) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:26 pmSo, when’s Jerry going to excise his “beard”?
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:28 pmColonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/12/2015 @ 7:48 am
That “slippery slope” started at a 5% downgrade, and finished at 100%.
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:38 pmThey are establishing secularism as the State Religion and no one seems to notice.
The odd and ridiculous thing about many of such people is they’re also the same ones who are bending over backwards to accommodate the reactionaries (or subset of ultra-rightists of Middle-Eastern variety) of Islamism. Across the Atlantic, their ilk are helping push Islamism and its adherents upon growing sections of Europe.
If the Western secular left and Islamic fundamentalist right meet on a future battle ground, sorry, I’m not going to root for either side. You’re on your own, liberals of the Western World.
Mark (aa035f) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:44 pm58- Daniel Pipes has some thoughts along those lines….
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:46 pm64- You mean like all the Sturm und Drang that we went through to overturn Dred Scott?
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:52 pmAnd what about all the lives rooted upon Plessy?
Count me as someone who thinks Obergefell was just as wrongly decided as the aforementioned.
Yeah, that’s Prom Queen’s plan down on the border. The administration can’t win it’s DACA case on the merits. It’s a blatant unconstitutional power grab. But, it needs to fight Judge Hanen’s injunction tooth and nail. So Tiger Beat can do as much damage as possibly.
So you can ask the same question.
How many times are you planning to fall for this, if indeed you are falling for it?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 12:58 pm68- The Left among us, and the Islamist’s abroad, share one over-riding sentiment:
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:01 pmA hatred of America!
The fact that the Left would be the beheading du jour if the Islamist’s take over completely escapes them.
Bulldust. Why are you making up such ridiculous stories?
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:02 pmI found the T shirt I’m going to be selling outside public schools next Cinco de Mayo.
http://shop.aviationmilitary.com/P-47-Thunderbolt-Aztec-Eagles-318.htm
Blow their freaky deaky minds.
Click on the pic to enlarge.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:05 pmAnd so, even if individual legislators now had standing to defend state laws, there would be no point in applying to rehear the case, because it wouldn’t matter; there is no defense that can now be made for Prop 8.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:06 pmJust like there was no appeal for Dred Scott?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:09 pmThe fact that the Left would be the beheading du jour if the Islamist’s take over completely escapes them.
The only thing that makes the horrific, brutal murders of people like journalist Daniel Pearl, etc, is a suspicion they’re the types who are philosophically-ideologically foolish enough to contentedly (and even smugly) invite the proverbial fox into the proverbial hen house. If so, they truly are their own worst enemies and ultimately can’t be saved—I imagine a lot of intellectual leftist Jews in Hitler’s Germany made for easy targets. I just resent it that such people are going to get us all destroyed in the process.
Mark (aa035f) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:15 pmSteve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:05 pm
In the interest of diversity, that T should have images of the Red Tailed P-47/51 of the Tuskeegee Airmen 332nd-FG, on the back.
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:17 pmEvery Cinco De Mayo we should all celebrate Las Aguilas Aztecas.
Let the SJWs squirm on the effin’ hook.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:18 pmDamages?! For what? And no, the majority did not say the meaning of the 14th amendment changes. If it now requires same-sex marriage then it must always have done so, and we just didn’t notice until now. Our eyes just skipped over that fnord section.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:19 pmI’ll have a hamburger, with Taco Sauce TYVM.
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:20 pmYep. And if Roe is ever overturned so would the pre-Roe abortion laws of every state that hasn’t changed them in the meantime.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:21 pmLet’s take one step at a time askeptic.
You want me to celebrate Mexico and Mexican culture on Cinco de Mayo?
Fine.
No problem.
http://www.aviationarthangar.com/fel23.html
Seriously. Not a problem. Proud to.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:22 pmThat would be up to the California voters.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:24 pmI think the likely scenario is that, just as in the DP situation, each state would have to craft a new law to synch with the latest thoughts of the Robed Wonders, or just leave it alone – as many did with the DP.
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:24 pmBut, now we have two instances where the Court has short-circuited the progress of the political branch, and “Katy bar the door”.
Celebrating this part of Mexican history would bring the US flag back into the classroom on Cinco de Mayo.
And why, amigos, should this part of Mexican history be forgotten?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:25 pm83- Personally, I don’t want you to do anything you don’t wish to do on your own.
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:27 pmAnd, I would bet that 99% of Mexicans, or Mexican-Americans, have no knowledge of that unit and its involvement in WW2.
Yeah.
http://minx.cc:1080/?post=357623
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:30 pmThat’s right, there was no appeal. There’s nowhere to appeal a Supreme Court constitutional decision. You just have to wait for a change in the court’s composition, or a change in a sitting justice’s opinion, and try to bring a new case.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:34 pm@87, I’m not doing anything I wouldn’t do on my own. How do you think I found out, years ago, about the Aztec Eagles? Somebody put a gun to my head?
And I know 99% of Mexicans/Mexican Americans have no clue. Which is the mind blowing part.
Which is why wearing the T shirt is so fun.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:35 pm@89, what change in the court did anyone wait for?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:36 pm91- That appeal only cost 600K lives, or as Thomas Sowell noted in a recent column:
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:44 pmOne life for every six slaves that were freed.
CJ Taney should be so proud.
To appeal Dred Scott? There was no appeal. To this day it remains the officially correct interpretation of the constitution as it then existed.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:50 pmThe holding was correct. The obiter dicta, by the Southern Justices, was arguably inflammatory.
nk (dbc370) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:53 pmThere is always a higher court, askeptic. Just as I was gently trying to tell Milhouse on another thread when he was talking about the official price of gold in 1933, there is always another market.
I enjoy people who think perception is reality. Right up until they wander into my carefully prepared interlocking fields of fire.
Yup yup yo. Yup yup yo.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 1:57 pmYour refusal to acknowledge reality is growing somewhat tiresome.
The court was overruled by a force greater then it. Yes or no?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:01 pmNo, it wasn’t. No law can be determined or changed by force of arms.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:05 pmr.e. #95 it never actually happened. I never shot anybody. I trained for it, just like I trained to fight the shipboard fires that never broke out, for twenty years.
But it never happened.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:06 pm@97, thank you King George.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:07 pmGrant versus Lee, Apparomatox Courthouse, April 9, 1865. Grant 36, Lee 0.
nk (dbc370) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:09 pmThe revolution didn’t change any laws either. The declaration of independence did, and the constitutional conventions of 1788 did, but no battle had any legal effect.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:12 pmI think I’m wasting my time here. This defies logic and the entirety of history.
I’m almost rendered speechless.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:14 pmSteve, it’s the basis of our whole civilization. Laws cannot be changed by violence.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:15 pmSection V of the constitution says how it can be amended. There’s nothing there about amendment by force of arms.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:15 pmTerms of surrender, including unconditional surrender, have the force of law. On both sides. Each side has duties and obligations, according to the victor’s laws and international laws and conventions of war for both the victor and the vanquished.
nk (dbc370) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:19 pmWell I certainly hope you’re wafting the scent of incense and good vibes in the general direction of ISIS to bring about peace on Earth.
I tried to check in with some Yazidi women about battles having any effect on their legal status as slaves, but the phone just rang and rang.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:20 pmAre you claiming that they are legally slaves, just because a gang has seized them and declared it so?!
Whether this is so or not, it has no effect on the laws of the land. They remain the same, no matter what the outcome of any war.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:23 pmThe question is, are we a nation of laws or of gangsterism?
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:24 pmI honestly have no idea what you’r arguing for, Milhouse, except that you are Milhouse, hear me roar!
As far as the Yazidi sex slaves, yes, they are legally slaves. ISIS controls territory and they have innumerable fatwas to fall back on.
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/new-fatwa-permits-rape-of-non-sunni-women-in-syria/
What, anymore, is your point?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:30 pmI don’t control Syria. I’ve never even had a vote in Syria. Or Iraq.
I hear they have laws.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:32 pmReality checks in and says, yes, they can.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:34 pmI’ll grant you that Cornwallis’s surrender did not change the laws in the Revolutionary War; it required the Treaty of Paris to do that. But Lee’s surrender placed the South under the United States’ laws for military occupation (before the Reconstruction Acts), superseding all others in place.
nk (dbc370) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:38 pmWell, bloody hell! Thanks Mexico!!
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-joaquin-el-chapo-guzman-escapes-20150712-story.html#page=1
elissa (791e54) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:52 pm#104, Milhouse, Section V of the constitution says how it can be amended. There’s nothing there about amendment by force of arms.
nk has a point at #112.
Consider the provenance of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments and decide if the force of arms didn’t
ropelight (355a00) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:53 pmcreate the conditions under which those amendments were ratified. Or, put another way, in the absence of force could those amendments have achieved the approval of 3/4ths of the States?
The question is, are we a nation of laws or of gangsterism?
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:24 pm
No… teh question is did you come strapped, playah?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/12/2015 @ 3:09 pmi remember back when failmerica could castigate mexico for being corrupt and incompetent
happyfeet (831175) — 7/12/2015 @ 3:11 pmAre you claiming that they are legally slaves, just because a gang has seized them and declared it so?!
Are you denying Mao’s dicta that all power comes from the barrel of a gun?
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 3:12 pmelissa (791e54) — 7/12/2015 @ 2:52 pm
I guess that Mexico is a “Sanctuary Country”.
askeptic (efcf22) — 7/12/2015 @ 3:14 pmHave you guys seen El Mariachi, the good one from 1992? In the opening scene, gangsters walk into a prison, give a bundle of cash to the warden, and attempt to kill another prisoner who kills them instead. Then he walks out to see the warden still counting the money from the killers, and he tosses her another bundle of cash from himself. I can’t remember if the warden even looks up.
nk (dbc370) — 7/12/2015 @ 3:27 pmMr. Rodriguez has his own channel now Mr. nk
he has a lucha libre show on it produced by Mark “The Bible” Burnett
yeah that’s not weird
the channel is headquartered in Austin – just like Torchy’s Tacos!
I thought his serialization of From Dusk to Dawn was a fun watch it has Don Johnson in it plus vampires
MEXICAN vampires
happyfeet (831175) — 7/12/2015 @ 3:40 pmThe question is, are we a nation of laws or of gangsterism?
Millhouse, always remember the phrase of “you can follow the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law.”
Mark (aa035f) — 7/12/2015 @ 4:02 pmYes Evolution is amazing. But actually this isnt a debate over evolution. It is very clear based on our current understanding of genetics that you cant create a giant population from a start of 2. Youre a doctor right? What would you tell a brother and sister who wanted to have kids? What about if their offspring wanted to have kids with the parents?
Nope Science has not answered everything, but apparently you have!
Oh thats right I forgot. The “God is magic” argument. This same argument applies to the many claims laid out in the bible. Men can live inside of fish. Animals can live at elevations that are 40 cubits higher than the highest mountaintop without freezing or dying of oxygen depravation. Kangaroos can warp thousands of miles to the middle east and then back to Australia without leaving traces of the migration. And now this: perfect genes mean that you can actually defy genetics. So tell me millhouse when did the mutations start? Upon expulsion from the garden? Or did they remain perfect until there were 10000 humans and then start for an unspecified reason?
Gil (4e1585) — 7/13/2015 @ 3:34 ami haven’t seen a single kangaroo yet in chicago
happyfeet (831175) — 7/13/2015 @ 4:50 amthat’s how stealthy they are
happyfeet (831175) — 7/13/2015 @ 4:51 amRaise your hand if you were unaware that Gil loathed Christianity.
JD (ca20f4) — 7/13/2015 @ 5:52 amI can hardly wait for him to criticize other books he hasn’t read or movies he hasn’t seen besides the Bible.
O/T and a serious question; can I use the two stroke gas/oil mixture in my truck? Without killing the truck?
I’m only forced to ask because of our national stupidity over ethanol. Which means gas don’t last even if you use Stabil. Or maybe it does but I have no faith in it soes I want to use it something and not keep it around. Bad gas means I’m on the third carburetor for the lawn mower, the second for the Ryobi power head, and also the chain saw.
Am I going to hurt the Toy’s engine if I put maybe a quarter gallon in per fill up?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 6:23 amYou didn’t answer the issue, Gil, just pontificated around it.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/13/2015 @ 7:14 amFWIW, I agree with Milhouse’s point from a logical consistency point of view. One may not believe it, but it is logically consistent, unlike what we’re told of the overlap between what modern genetics claims and neo-darwinism claims.
Though I’m guessing you wouldn’t agree that grass is green if I was the first one to tell you.
As I’ve said before, responses to you are primarily for the sake of onlookers who may think you have appoint, but popping up does remind me to pray for you.
The theory of evolution accounts for this. It is continuously refined and is not in any controversy or debate. That it happened is fact. How it happened is always being refined and understood more thoroughly.
Lets be clear. Is it your position is that 2 animals from a given species can eventually populate a planet regardless of inbreeding and genetic variation concerns? If so one need not take seriously your claim to expertise about modern genetics and any possible conflict with the theory evolution. I ask again, if 2 humans inbreeding is not a concern would you recommend it to your patients?
Sure, it is impossible not to have consistent logic if you have one explanation all the time “God is magic”! But here is a question: Did God reset the gene pool to have perfection after the flood? Remember the only way to repopulate the earth after that was mass inbreeding once again.
-Gil
Gil (febf10) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:23 amOf course a gangster like Mao would think like that. Are you identifying with him? Guns may give you power, but they will never give you legitimacy.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:35 amI’d have more confidence in the ‘splainers of evolution if they could tell how long my gas is good for. I’ve had a couple of gallons for six months and I don’t trust it.
Yes. I am the idiot. I thought I could economize. I bought the two stroke oil additive PLUS fuel stabilizer. Then I failed to burn through it. Because. Life.
So can I rid myself of this crap a cup at a time without fouling the injectors or what?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:39 amThere is no “spirit of the law”. When someone invokes the “spirit of the law” it’s because they want to break the letter. “Congress intended to improve health insurance, not to break it.”
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:40 amMilhouse, I intend for history to legitimize me as I intend to write it.
Once I figure out what to do with the spare gas in the garage.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:42 amI’ll prolly dig a ditch in the yard, pour it out, and see if it burns.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:43 amGod is the one who made life in the first place; why would He deliberately create bad genes? Just to be perverse?!
You are the one defying genetics. If you don’t have bad recessives, then inbreeding is good; it preserves good recessive traits. That’s how we get thoroughbreds.
Presumably. And to explain the current genetic diversity I would imagine the mutation rate was higher than it is now.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:46 amGil, I believe you are either dodging the issue or do not understand enough to see the issue,(or maybe some of both?)
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/13/2015 @ 9:24 amagain, that is for any observers.
All you are doing is using “Because evolution!!” as a phrase, without clarifying the logical conflict in your statements.
But you are simply being annoying.
Anybody other than Gil need the conflict pointed out more clearly? I’ll check back later.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/13/2015 @ 9:26 amNaw, I’m good, doc.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 9:45 amThere is no conflict. Not one serious, reputable academic institution or peer reviewed scientific journal will tell you today that humanity originated with one single male and one single female. It is preposterous. There was no first man or first woman.
Also, Im not dodging anything. You have unecessarily complicated the issue when you asked if it takes more than a single pair of creatures (“higher” creatures, anyway) to build a population, how did any advanced life form come to exist? As if my inability to answer in detail of how life became complex has any bearing on whether or not inbreeding is a good thing. I am not a biologist. But I trust the evidence that is plainly available, universities and organizations like the National Academy of Sciences that support the theory of evolution.
Gil (febf10) — 7/13/2015 @ 11:21 amI dont know, he deliberately placed the tree of knowledge in the garden knowing what the outcome would be. That outcome included bad genes. You tell me why he did it.
Gil (febf10) — 7/13/2015 @ 11:23 am@139, did you read the book? Was that the only tree?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 11:40 amI am not a biologist. But I trust the evidence that is plainly available, universities and organizations like the National Academy of Sciences that support the theory of evolution.
Gil (febf10) — 7/13/2015 @ 11:21 am
Do you also consult mathematicians to see if 2+2=4.
I can easily forgive your lack of knowledge of specific information, as I lack all kinds of information as well,
what is not as forgivable is refusing to use simple logic to ask a question.
This is actually how “science” works, theory A and theory B bump into each other and can’t both be right at the same time.
Anybody other than Gil wishes to continue?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:05 pmGil – explain to us the origin of the species then. If 2 was insufficient, explain to us the genesis of the first 20 humans; or whatever science-y figure you choose to pull from your sphincter.
JD (ed4da1) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:10 pmthe origin of the species is something of an enigma
we don’t even know how Johnson & Johnson’s K-Y jelly got its name
god help us
happyfeet (a037ad) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:19 pm“Neo-Darwinian process?” Come on.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:30 pmIndeed, sir. We have our hands and our swords in them.
Assuming you have a sword.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:44 pmhttp://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2015/07/09/god-help-us-all/
I’ll be in the hills scrounging for acorns.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:48 pmAs usual, JD, you express my sentiments with a fraction of the words and effort…
carlitos (c24ed5) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:30 pm
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/13/2015 @ 12:58 pmWhat is the protest about terminology?
Heres the thing JD. Even if I am wrong, it doesnt mean you are right. What is this a 3rd grade schoolyard argument “oh yeah well if your so smart why dont you tell us how it works!”
To the reasonable people out there: (Are there any) Ask yourselves what is more likely, to what do we have evidence of? That a magical sky god made 2 people and they populated the earth through means which we cannot reconcile with reality? Or that a tried and tested theory which has been used to predict the location and age of fossils (the story of tiktaalik) is closer to reality?
To answer your question JD it was a gradual change over millions of years. Look at the similarities between fossils, look at the timelines and where fossils are located. Research the tree of life. Evolution is quite easily falsifiable. It predicts no one will ever find a human fossil and a dinosaur fossil in the same time frame. If someone could falsify evolution they would be famous. The arguments today are not if it happened, but how.
Is this really what it comes down to? You suspending what you know that a family cannot continue to inbreed succesfully and trading it with “all things are possible through god”?
Gil (4e1585) — 7/13/2015 @ 7:39 pmSimple logic as in: “today we know inbreeding doesnt work, however roll the clock back 6000 years and suddenly it does. Because in that case God did it and he made the genes perfect back then”. Sounds like a logical fallacy known as special pleading to me.
Furthermore your nonsense question offers a false choice between needing more than a single pair of “higher creatures” to spawn a population and specific knowledge of how complex species arose. It is not on me to prove or explain the theory of evolution. It is common knowledge. Its like if I were to ask “Of yeah if there isn’t a pink teapot at the center of every planet creating gravity, then how do you reconcile the strong, weak and gravitational forces?”
Gil (4e1585) — 7/13/2015 @ 7:51 pmGil – that might have been the most predictable nonsense from you. Ever. Your anti-Christian hatred and bigotry blind you to how mendoucheous you are. I should have known better.
JD (ed4da1) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:10 pm“[A]t best … troglodyte, at worst un-Christian” is what Gov. Jerry Brown (D) thinks of you if you oppose the leftwing policies that killed Kate Steinle. What a leftwing putz.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:21 pmSome of the first critters on Earth had gils… to help them breathe. ’bout all they’re good for.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/13/2015 @ 8:24 pmEvolution is quite easily falsifiable.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/14/2015 @ 6:44 amNot true (for onlookers).
And it ensures that this will never happen, by defining any rock in which a dinosaur fossil is found as different from and older than any rock in which a human fossil is found.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/14/2015 @ 6:56 amWhy would you assume that the first humans God made would have defective genes? How is that a logical assumption? And we do know that without defective genes there is no risk from inbreeding.
Actually, it just occurred to me that we don’t need to go there. We know that right now there is no long-term problem with inbreeding, so long as you don’t count the birth of defective babies, who will not survive to breed, as a problem. And for the propagation of a species that isn’t a problem. On the contrary, that is how thoroughbreds are created. Eliminate the bad genes and what you have left are the good ones, which can be inbred indefinitely with no bad effect.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/14/2015 @ 7:04 amI do not assume any such thing. I do not claim to know how life started or where the universe came from. I am assuming only things which are observed in reality today. That inbreeding is not a good way to spawn billions of humans from a source of two. That is commonly well known based on studies of low population species and minimum viable population estimates. Once again my assumptions are based on real world observations and evidence.
You are assuming 4 things on 0 evidence:
1. There is a god and he is the god of the bible
2. He created humans
3. He created them with perfect genes that would not mutate
4. Mutations and recessives started after expulsion from the garden at some unspecified time and for an unspecified reason
Why would you assume these things?
Futhermore though inbreeding may be used to amplify traits desired in thoroughbreds, you are leaving out the fact that bad traits and mutations are also created. Those with the undesireable traits are culled. So no inbreeding alone does not lead to thoroughbreds.
Gil (febf10) — 7/14/2015 @ 9:45 amI am certainly not assuming that ” 3. He created them with perfect genes that would not mutate”. That doesn’t even make sense. Why would you think I assume it? Genes mutate, as they are struck by cosmic rays or other radiation in their environments. It’s what they do. All I’m assuming is that their Maker started them out without any defects. It’s not a necessary assumption, but it’s certainly a plausible one.
In any case, even with defective genes it is patently not the case that one can’t propagate a species from two individuals. All it means is that you will end up with a lot of descendants in whom the bad recessives are expressed. The remaining descendants will be more successful and will have a cleaner genome.
Milhouse (7d5ad7) — 7/14/2015 @ 1:27 pmUm, yes, inbreeding alone does lead to thoroughbreds. That’s what the term means. It also leads to defectives, who won’t breed. Why is that a problem for propagating a species?
Milhouse (7d5ad7) — 7/14/2015 @ 1:28 pm