Here we go again...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Which areas Imran? You are a lawyer what did Scalia actually say? If you are going to refer to Scalia, you should actually quote his ruling in the recent decision.

Jesus Christ, it's on the second page of the freaking ruling, you lazy git!

should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms

[Imran Siddiqui]

but because of what the justices in the US have ruled

Cause Justices have never later decided they were wrong? What do you think of people going against "seperate but equal"? Should they have gone with it because the Justices said it was Constitutional and thus, in your opinion, "just"?

[Ben Kenobi]

students should not be forced to choose between their safety and obtaining an education.

Exactly! Someone gets it. I don't want to go to a campus where I could get gunned down by some lunatic on a power trip.

Universities should be like the real world and permit students to carry their weapons if they choose to do so.

[Ben Kenobi]

should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms

In schools?

How does a bubble ban on the entire grounds of a university campus equate to not being able to carry a gun into the building of a school?

Scalia by referring to buildings, clearly means that it's ok for a school to post that you are not allowed to carry a gun into the school.

Clearly the obnoxious gun free zones on campus grounds are unconstitutional. I hope someone hauls a student to courts soon over this issue, because he brought a gun on campus.

[Ben Kenobi]

Cause Justices have never later decided they were wrong? What do you think of people going against "seperate but equal"? Should they have gone with it because the Justices said it was Constitutional and thus, in your opinion, "just"?

So you reject stare decisis? Awful big bag of worms Imran.

[Imran Siddiqui]

In schools?

How does a bubble ban on the entire grounds of a university campus equate to not being able to carry a gun into the building of a school?

Is a University a school, Ben?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


How are your freedoms impaired? You are not an American citizen. You are perfectly free to marry whomever you want here, and you have chosen to evade my question.

Yes. I am both an American and a Canadian citizen. I have explicitly stated in this very thread I am also an American citizen. You are AGAIN avoiding the topic with what you view as technicalities, when even those are wrong.

Only in your own mind.

No, in the mind of a HUGE portion of the US population it is an unjust and unconstitutional law. As such, you would have them ignore the law and permit gay marriage.

I'm sorry asher, it's not my opinion, which is meaningless.

It is your opinion. And your opinion is meaningless.

The bottom line is it's not up to Ben Kenobi which laws are just and constitutional.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So you reject stare decisis? Awful big bag of worms Imran.

Has the Supreme Court gotten cases wrong in the past before in your opinion? And if they have, does that mean you've rejected stare decisis?

I don't know of a single jurist/professor who believes in stare decisis that thinks the Court gets it correct all the time. Not one. The world is not either or, Ben, no matter how much you want to make it so.

[rmsharpe]

Originally posted by Asher
I'm not sure you could make the case that someone is law-abiding if they carry a gun in violation of a local law.

That doesn't make any sense; I'm talking about repealing the "gun-free" zoning nonsense so that they can carry around their campus.

This must be some kind of republican mind game you are playing with yourself.

No, you either misread or deliberately misinterpreted my point.

Do you believe people should be able to bring guns on airplanes as well?

If the airline would allow it... but I can't think of many airlines that would want depressurized airplane cabins.

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes. I am both an American and a Canadian citizen. I have explicitly stated in this very thread I am also an American citizen. You are AGAIN avoiding the topic with what you view as technicalities, when even those are wrong.

Are your freedoms impaired? Simple question, yes or no.

No, in the mind of a HUGE portion of the US population it is an unjust and unconstitutional law. As such, you would have them ignore the law and permit gay marriage.

I would have them ignore the law and have ceremonies which they call 'marriage' if they wish to do so. I don't see anything in the constitution preventing them from having 'marriage' ceremonies to celebrate their togetherness.

Are you talking about the people or the civil authorities?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Are your freedoms impaired? Simple question, yes or no.

Yes, because I would not be able to marry my partner in the US or if we move there, it would not be recognized either.

DUH. DUHDUHDUH.

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes, because I would not be able to marry my partner in the US or if we move there, it would not be recognized either.

Honestly if I were a dual citizen and I loved someone but I couldn't get married to them in one nation I was a citizen, I'd get married to them in the other.

But that's just me. I guess I'm strange that way.

There's nothing keeping you from getting married here except your own decisions.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Honestly if I were a dual citizen and I loved someone but I couldn't get married to them in one nation I was a citizen, I'd get married to them in the other.

But that's just me. I guess I'm strange that way.

There's nothing keeping you from getting married here except your own decisions.

You are so ****ing obtuse.

I happen to be lucky enough to be a dual citizen, most people are not.

Gay men cannot get married to eachother in most places in the US due to unconstitutional and unjust laws by homophobic homosexual born again Christians such as yourself. If they also were as stupid as you and thought laws are only to be followed if they personally thought they were just, there'd be gay marriage everywhere.

How can one man be wrong so much? You're ****ing epic. You can't even hold a single conversation without being wrong as to the ****ing premise. You're like a cross between Ernest P. Worrell, PeeWee Herman, Fred Phelps, and Larry Craig.

[rmsharpe]

Why would gays want to get married in the first place if it's just a Christian religious tradition?

[Julian Delphiki]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Why would gays want to get married in the first place if it's just a Christian religious tradition?

Legal reasons, equality etc? It's not like Christianity has monopoly on marriage anyway.

Whoa, did this thread get derailed a bit at some point...?