Posted on 08/04/2005 2:02:37 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Yes well, Romer is the case that the gay activists are using to overturn the state marriage amendments.
I feel for you I am not in an industry where those types of hard ethics come up. I understand your thinking, but we have all been in a job with small kids to feed and swallowed hard and done what was requested. Well, at least I have. Call me a coward, but bills have to be payed.
I respectfully suggest you read the opinion:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/romer.html
and then come back and express your opinion. The link is to the Court's opinion and to Scalia's dissent. Romer was one of the most far reaching acts of left-wing judicial activism in the past 50 years.
Perhaps Ann Coulter is right. I said here that when he has a wife who feels the need to call herslf a feminist, even one who is pro-life, I cannot trust him to be a conservative.
It really wasn't. The Colorado law did not disallow making gays a protected class, like blacks, Jews and women. The law required refusal of government services to people who identified as gay. For example, a gay book club couldn't meet in a library. A gay bowling club could be denied the use of a community center. The real fear was that, down the road, city-owned hospital could deny treatment to gays. "This Colorado cannot do," Sandra wrote.
If Judge Roberts HAD to work with a "gay activist" wouldn't it be better, if he disagreed with the whole case, to do it pro bono rather than being paid. The payment would have been like Judas & the 30 pieces of silver. Rather blood-money-ish.
Where in the Constitution does it state a citizen has the right to rent someone else's property or work for a private business? It doesn't. The law was perfectly Constitutional.
Sparky, that wasn't the issue of the Colorado case. The statute was about the government being forced to deny services to gay citizens.
Forgot to mention: "That makes it a 14th amendment issue."
I think this is a plant story now. The left is in a panic since it is apparent Roberts was going to get approved.
For anyone who does not know, when you are preparing to argue an appeal it is important to practice.
You get volunteers to act as the Judges and just go through the case having the pretend judges shoot questions at you. It is a valuable practice too.
It is not case specific.
It should also be noted that pro bono cases are also used by law firms to give valuble courtroom practice time to attorneys. Most cases settle so getting to argue in a courtroom has value. Pro Bono cases are such a tool.
Spending a few hours as a pretend judge in a mock appelate panel is hardly a devastatingly unique help. Whoever is calling the help "crucial" is just playing concervatives for suckers.
Did roberts sign his name on any papers? NO
did roberts write any pleadings? NO
Did Roberts edit any draft briefs? Apparently not.
This is a stinky rat trick at this point. We need to call the Rats on this trick.
"Oh puh-leease!"
And puh-leease tell us what is the difference between
you and the Kennedys and the Reids who have prejudged
the nominee without giving him a hearing?
Oh, yes, I remember now. Some Freepers reserve for
themselves things they want to deny to others.
Now bow your head and continue your worship session.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.