trinityvixen (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
trinityvixen) wrote2008-05-14 02:54 pm
trinityvixen) wrote2008-05-14 02:54 pm
Entry tags:
How about some actual news with the news?
More about the California decision.
Most important part, right here:
The California Supreme Court was the first state high court to strike down a law barring interracial marriage, in a 1948 decision called Perez v. Sharp. The United States Supreme Court did not follow suit until 1967.
Thursday’s decision was rooted in two rationales, and both drew on the Perez decision.
The first was that marriage is a fundamental constitutional right. “The right to marry,” Chief Justice George wrote, “represents the right of an individual to establish a legally recognized family with a person of one’s choice and, as such, is of fundamental significance both to society and to the individual.”
Chief Justice George conceded that “as an historical matter in this state marriage has always been restricted to a union between a man and a woman.” But “tradition alone,” the chief justice continued, does not justify the denial of a fundamental constitutional right. Bans on interracial marriage were, he wrote, sanctioned by the state for many years.
Tradition. You've got to be fucking kidding me. TRADITION is a good enough reason to deny people basic human rights? Find me the people who think so right now. I'd like to initiate them into the tradition of me stabbing them in the groin with rusty knives.
Most important part, right here:
The California Supreme Court was the first state high court to strike down a law barring interracial marriage, in a 1948 decision called Perez v. Sharp. The United States Supreme Court did not follow suit until 1967.
Thursday’s decision was rooted in two rationales, and both drew on the Perez decision.
The first was that marriage is a fundamental constitutional right. “The right to marry,” Chief Justice George wrote, “represents the right of an individual to establish a legally recognized family with a person of one’s choice and, as such, is of fundamental significance both to society and to the individual.”
Chief Justice George conceded that “as an historical matter in this state marriage has always been restricted to a union between a man and a woman.” But “tradition alone,” the chief justice continued, does not justify the denial of a fundamental constitutional right. Bans on interracial marriage were, he wrote, sanctioned by the state for many years.
Tradition. You've got to be fucking kidding me. TRADITION is a good enough reason to deny people basic human rights? Find me the people who think so right now. I'd like to initiate them into the tradition of me stabbing them in the groin with rusty knives.
no subject
You have the chutspah to say what many of the rest of us are thinking but are too timid to come right out and say, and that totally rocks!
no subject
(Although, strangely, I have yet to get through the Wee Free Men books. Oh well.)
Seriously, I wish I were half as cool as Olbermann and could sit and vent spleens on TV. However, I have a potty mouth, and the FCC would be all over my ass with just this sentence alone. :P
I have never not voiced my opinion loudly and obnoxiously. I feel bad because I don't want to offend, but I just don't how not to say things I feel about stuff. (Try to be more vague, why not?) I usually add the caveat of "If you don't agree, yell your own opinion back at me. Insult about me that which I insult about you." For small things like TV shows ("OMG THAT SHOW YOU LIKE IS SO STUPID."), it works okay, I hope, mostly as I know I like indefensibly bad things.
But for fucking human rights!? If you don't ride on the side of best intentions, you're basically opposed to human rights. It's like the Republicans voting down that "Moms are awesome!" note in Congress the other week. How the fuck can you be against having it publicly declared that moms are awesome? Moms are awesome.
And, yes, dude, drinking, any time! Drunken liberals are so hot.
no subject
I am a Pratchett fan, yep! I have an autographed copy of Wintersmith, too. The WFM books are not as racy as the non-YA Discworld stuff, but I find them enjoyable. :)
If you had your own show, I would watch it. Maybe on cable you could get away with the swearing.
I will probably be out barhopping early next month - we should coordinate! :)
no subject
Yeah, keep me posted about outings. I'm usually good for 'em.