Voters Will overturned by Activist Judge

[Myth1184]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/16/ge....ap/index.html

A Single person decided today that he would overthrow the will of 76% of the voters of Georgia today, saying the ban on gay marriage in the state violated single subject rule in voting.

Nice to know the will of the people can be tossed aside by a single judge who legislates behind the bench

Myth1184 Reviewed by Myth1184 on 05-17-2006. Voters Will overturned by Activist Judge http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/16/georgia.gay.marriage.ap/index.html A Single person decided today that he would overthrow the will of 76% of the voters of Georgia today, saying the ban on gay marriage in the state violated single subject rule in voting. Nice to know the will of the people can be tossed aside by a single judge who legislates behind the bench Rating: 5

[Gumby]

maybe you should complian about Rove not being able to but it on the ballot right...

and please, don't bitch about too many Liberal judges cause that's just bullshit... look at the confirmation hearings...

just another person bitching about something they know nothing about... go back to your Bible and read how we should blow up the world...

[graymatter]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/16/ge....ap/index.html

A Single person decided today that he would overthrow the will of 76% of the voters of Georgia today, saying the ban on gay marriage in the state violated single subject rule in voting.

Nice to know the will of the people can be tossed aside by a single judge who legislates behind the bench

Wasn't our system set up that way...? to check the "tyranny" of the majority? :dance: Why shouldn't gay people have the right to battle it out in a divorce settlement, the same way 45% - 50% of traditional marriages end?

[jamstigator]

I read that story, but the judge seemed to be more of an anal-retentive rules stickler than anything else. They phrased the law wrong, according to their own laws, combining two subjects into one, depriving the voters of the ability to vote yes for one thing and no for the other thing. The judge merely prevented the voters from being deprived of that right, as he should have done according to the law, and as the voters should expect him to do.

As for the issue itself, well, since I will never be involved in a gay marriage, I don't really see it as my business, but I'd probably vote to allow gay marriages. I mean, if gays get married, it isn't going to do me any harm, and if it makes 'em happy, that's cool with me.