<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Happy marriage in sunny California</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/</link>
	<description>Ron Coleman’s retired general topic blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 10:32:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Same-sex marriage laws: Not amenable to democracy? &#171; Likelihood of Success</title>
		<link>http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/comment-page-1/#comment-3603</link>
		<dc:creator>Same-sex marriage laws: Not amenable to democracy? &#171; Likelihood of Success</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jerseylaw.wordpress.com/?p=1123#comment-3603</guid>
		<description>[...] me to learn that same-sex marriage is one of its &#8220;organizing principles.&#8221; But it wouldn&#8217;t surprise me to learn that its Supreme Court would say that it [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] me to learn that same-sex marriage is one of its &#8220;organizing principles.&#8221; But it wouldn&#8217;t surprise me to learn that its Supreme Court would say that it [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/comment-page-1/#comment-3599</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 21:02:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jerseylaw.wordpress.com/?p=1123#comment-3599</guid>
		<description>&quot;Ever heard the phrase “tyranny of the majority”?&quot;

Yeah, it ranks right beside &quot;mutiny of the judiciary.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Ever heard the phrase “tyranny of the majority”?&#8221;</p>
<p>Yeah, it ranks right beside &#8220;mutiny of the judiciary.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shep</title>
		<link>http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/comment-page-1/#comment-3598</link>
		<dc:creator>shep</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 18:45:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jerseylaw.wordpress.com/?p=1123#comment-3598</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;at all costs prevent the occurrence of democracy …&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

Democracy come in many forms, my friend, and ballot initiatives are one of the crappiest. In any event, popular will itself has lead to quite undemocratic outcomes (slavery, no voting rights for women, etc.) which is why the Founders chose representation. Ever heard the phrase &quot;tyranny of the majority&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;at all costs prevent the occurrence of democracy …&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Democracy come in many forms, my friend, and ballot initiatives are one of the crappiest. In any event, popular will itself has lead to quite undemocratic outcomes (slavery, no voting rights for women, etc.) which is why the Founders chose representation. Ever heard the phrase &#8220;tyranny of the majority&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hydralisk</title>
		<link>http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/comment-page-1/#comment-3600</link>
		<dc:creator>hydralisk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 02:19:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jerseylaw.wordpress.com/?p=1123#comment-3600</guid>
		<description>The effect seems to be a decoupling of marriage from procreation as a legitimate state interest. If sexual orientation is irrelevant, then creation of children must also be (as well as, one would hope, sex itself). And if that&#039;s the case, then is there anything now stopping me from applying for a marriage license with a friend or a neighbor or a sister or a cousin or a daughter? I could use some benef--er, I mean rights.

Damn it, give me my rights!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The effect seems to be a decoupling of marriage from procreation as a legitimate state interest. If sexual orientation is irrelevant, then creation of children must also be (as well as, one would hope, sex itself). And if that&#8217;s the case, then is there anything now stopping me from applying for a marriage license with a friend or a neighbor or a sister or a cousin or a daughter? I could use some benef&#8211;er, I mean rights.</p>
<p>Damn it, give me my rights!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/comment-page-1/#comment-3601</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 22:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jerseylaw.wordpress.com/?p=1123#comment-3601</guid>
		<description>Two poles and both are positive make charge at either one
So that canceled out are not at ends they&#039;ve just begun,
By court of law the natural is questioned and addressed
And finding better substitute all precedent redressed,
The people finding in their stance the public misaligned
Supremely are they chastened and by judgment reassigned,
The moral of this story is that judges judge the law
You cannot remake culture til you&#039;ve adjudged all the flaws
And who could condemn better than a lawyer&#039;s best defense
That what is best the common good is really just expense?
If everyone&#039;s conformance is that everyone is free
Then liberty&#039;s more geared to whim than cut to be a key,
When positive to positive are said to both attract
Then why do people argue, just let arbiters enact,
If citizens were wiser then as judges they would be
Better to be subjects who are ruled in absentee,
For the wisest who among us understand our true intent
Are noble in their private parts, they do not need assent,
So public do not worry long or fret if all is well
And if this seems quite queer to you then you can go to hell.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two poles and both are positive make charge at either one<br />
So that canceled out are not at ends they&#8217;ve just begun,<br />
By court of law the natural is questioned and addressed<br />
And finding better substitute all precedent redressed,<br />
The people finding in their stance the public misaligned<br />
Supremely are they chastened and by judgment reassigned,<br />
The moral of this story is that judges judge the law<br />
You cannot remake culture til you&#8217;ve adjudged all the flaws<br />
And who could condemn better than a lawyer&#8217;s best defense<br />
That what is best the common good is really just expense?<br />
If everyone&#8217;s conformance is that everyone is free<br />
Then liberty&#8217;s more geared to whim than cut to be a key,<br />
When positive to positive are said to both attract<br />
Then why do people argue, just let arbiters enact,<br />
If citizens were wiser then as judges they would be<br />
Better to be subjects who are ruled in absentee,<br />
For the wisest who among us understand our true intent<br />
Are noble in their private parts, they do not need assent,<br />
So public do not worry long or fret if all is well<br />
And if this seems quite queer to you then you can go to hell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Avigdor MBawlmawr</title>
		<link>http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2008/05/15/happy-marriage-in-sunny-california/comment-page-1/#comment-3602</link>
		<dc:creator>Avigdor MBawlmawr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 21:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jerseylaw.wordpress.com/?p=1123#comment-3602</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been in the shadows for too long! Now, I can go to California where Fido and I can live without shame!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been in the shadows for too long! Now, I can go to California where Fido and I can live without shame!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.285 seconds -->
