Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (224449)	3/17/2005 1:04:06 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571168

Of course, its a restriction.....others are allowed what some are not. The only restriction is on state and local governments who are not allowed to recognize the union as a marriage. And it is unconstitutional even if everyone but the minority approves of it. Please quote the part of the constitution that makes restrictions on same ex marriage unconstitutional. Its a separate but equal restriction ..........the constitution does not allow separate but equal. "In a famous and eloquent dissent in Plessy, Justice John Harlan argued, "Our Constitution is color blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among its citizens." " And gender blind. law.umkc.edu If a judge uses opinion as the basis for his/her ruling as opposed to constitutionality, then his/her ruling will be thrown out upon appeal. Not always, and never if it is a USSC decision. True courts rarely if ever explicitly say "I'm going to impose my opinion and to hell with the constitution", but going against what the constitution actually says isn't that rare and using justifications other than the constitution itself is starting to become common. Please provide of an example where the USSC went against the constitution. Since the Constitution defines our democracy, it also is undemocratic... ...However, the American Constitution defines the American democracy. Therefore, if you violate the Constitution, you are violating the democracy. The constitution is the basic law for our country, but democracy does not require a written constitution, and a written constitution does not mean that you automatically have a democracy. So what? That's not what I said. ted