Letters to the Editor
Derbig Mooser
Published Letters: 1587
-
Framers at Work!
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Framing the principles which guided the great civil and individual rights decisions of the Supreme Court as an "ideology" has been a right-wing weasely tactic for years. Started hearing that right after the Civil Rights laws were passed.
It's like the legal equivalent of "outside agitators" or something, I don't know.
And of course, if something is simply the product of "ideology" well, then, we can just drop it when the ideology changes can't we?
Of course, those decisions couldn't be the result of basic and immutable (to the extent anything political is, but we can hope) principles inherent in our Constitution, no, just "ideologies".
That Ideology word is the thin edge of the web. Oh, and "the landscape of public opinion"- just fashion.
-
A Lovely Drive-by Wedding
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I just don't understand why anyone, gay or straight, would want to be associated with this barnacled and hypocritical institution.
That's what I asked her Dad, but he just leveled the gun at my chest and said: "Get on with it! Wilt thou..."
Didn't seem like the time for a debate.
-
@Arne
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Arne, all congratulations on your coming nuptials. Don't worry, it'll go off perfectly. After all, marriage is a lot like deep-sea diving! A few minutes of narcosis, and then an interminable decompression.
I got married 18 years ago, and I've still got bubbles in my blood.
So best wishes, Arne, and the rest of us will just go on dreaming about the brave new world of polygamy and polyandry.
What the hell, they can't divorce you for thinkin' can they?
-
@Dan Greaney
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One need not review precedents to doubt that a constituon which tolerated a legal status quo for years suddenly forbids it.
I'm with you Dan! THE SOUTH SHALL RISE AGAIN!!!
We'll have Obama mixing us mint juleps on the verandah, when we get the laws back (or forward?) to where they should be!
See, any day now science is gonna come up with a whole new proof for racial theory and sexual identification- and we'll know just what to do with it, huh Dan!
Civil rights was just a passing fancy, but our love is here to stay!
-
Are you kidding?
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If one person can explain how gay marriage will adversly affect his/her existence, I'd sure like to know.
Two fellows who I believe are a committed gay couple have moved in down the block from us. And it's starting already. "Why doesn't our lawn look like that?", "You know we could do that with our windows"
And I can hear the distinct hum of invidious comparisons hovering nearer and nearer. And man, can my better half invidiate.
It used to be my castle. Now it's just another house that's not as nice as Ted and Scott's.
-
Duel-It-Yourself, and Save!
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was only arguing that while precedent is surely important, the ideology of the judges on the bench effects their review and application of that precedent and, by extention, the constitution.
Oh, so that's what you were arguing! Let me see if I have this right. You are arguing that while precedent is surely important, the ideology of the judges on the bench effects their review and application of that precedent and, by extention, the constitution. Is that it?
Sure, that's only reasonable.
In that case, I retract my challenge and do not require deadly combat to assuage my affronted honor.
Don't worry, I'll e-mail all the seconds and return the pistols to the rental place.
It was you I challenged to a duel, right?
-
@ The Nose
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry, my old improbably proboscular friend, it must have been someone else. Don't give it another thought. I forget who it is, but you now what they say: The hour will produce the man.
-
Et Al
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Now that you mention it William, I would like to reccomend my method, which seems to have worked now, twice.
Just remind any given troll that there is an archive of their comments, and ask would they like to go over some of those old letters and give a fuller explanation.
I can't be sure that's what did it, but it did seem to chase them away, and might also, if a newcomer took a look say, at a certain macher's letters, prevent them from wasting their time feeding them.
I mean, if they come here wanting to be fed, I've got their favorite food for them- grade A prime bullshit. with a dribbling of mere persiflage around the plate to finish the dish.
All I'm trying to do is clear a little space for the people I can learn from. People who make a practice of abusing their hosts(Greenwald is payed by Iran, is a smear artist, etc.) that usually isn't.
And if I can bring a smile to a care-worn cheek, or cause a guffaw or two, my work is done. It's just my "ideology".
-
@LWM
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As you know, your posts make me all tingly, like the Wright Bros. (Ask Peggy Noonan about it), but could you be maybe a little more scrupulous, nope, wrong word, say, a little more exacting about distinguishing quoted material from your own comments within a comment. When there are quotes within the quotes you post it gets hard to sort out.
Quotation marks and italics are useful for that, as is block-quoting.
I know it's extra work, but... Hell, do it for buckyl! He'll love you for it!
-
@Mona
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What, are you like, dense? It's cause I have a crush on you. If you had a pigtail and I had an inkwell, well, you know the rest!
-
@Mona
[Read the article: California's marriage ruling -- what it means and what it doesn't mean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You thought I was referring to you when I was talking about "trolls" in that comment? I wasn't. Sorry if it appeared that way to you.
But of course Mona, you are right. We all need a little "fairness" huh?