Drew Dowdell

It's not a liberal v. conservative thing so don't take it there. Quite honestly, I don't know which way Roberts would fall as a conservative but not (as much) a constructionist. Scalia and Thomas are both self avowed constructionists when interpreting the Constitution. They claim that they strictly interpret the Constitution in the way the framers intended it to be read. They cannot hold that position AND hold that DOMA does not violate the Full Faith and Credit clause. It's one or the other. It would be extraordinarily hypocritical <even for these two> to try and hold both positions. The "liberal" justices subscribe to the idea that the Constitution is a living document that was intended to be changed over the years. (this is the position I hold, the framer's wouldn't have provided an amendment process otherwise). If you subscribe to the idea that the Constitution can be interpreted in different ways, it's not hypocritical to suggest a different interpretation of your own. I'm not saying the "liberal" justices are never hypocritical.... just that they aren't in terms of constructualism.

DOMA itself is an overstep of authority. It violates the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution quite blatantly. Parts of it have already been ruled unconstitutional by the 9th circuit. I expect a full ruling against it will come as soon as Scalia or Thomas is off the bench. Those two will rule in favor of keeping it but be incredibly hypocritical and partisan when they do.

No it doesn't. DOMA basically takes the Feds out of the state level decisions.

That's really what it boils down to. Sexuality should not determine how laws apply to you.

There's more Mini than Infiniti in that interior....

I don't get it. What is stylistic about a giant black slab on the front of the vehicle?

Was he trying to make an AuroraBird?

I'll post it if you really want me to.... but suffice it to say that 25% of this site's population are of alternate sexuality and a large segment of the "regulars" are gay. A great many more members of this site care about gay marriage than there are members who care about B-pillars....... not that there's anything wrong with that.

The gay marriage fight isn't about legislating something that doesn't exist into existence. It's about recognizing that something already exists and the laws don't fairly address that something. It is not in society's best interest to prevent the stabilizing factor that comes with marriage and banning gay marriage won't end gayness or gay couples being together. All it does is prevent the legal protections that marriage provides. It's almost spiteful. Sometimes I wonder if the people who are against gay marriage are just worried we'll be better at it than them.... I'm going to be with Albert with or without gay marriage. What do "the haters" care if he gets to inherit my house tax free in the sad event I'm run down by a Pruis?

Amazon Dolphin - The Amazon River dolphin or boto has been reported to form up in bands of 3-5 individuals enjoying group sex. The groups usually comprise young males and sometimes one or two females. American Bison - Courtship, mounting, and full anal penetration between bulls has been noted to occur among American Bison Penguins - In early February 2004 the New York Times reported that a male pair of chinstrap penguins in the Central Park Zoo in New York City were partnered and even successfully hatched a female chick from an egg. Elephants - Males, who in elephants live apart from the general flock, often form "companionships", consisting of an older individual and one or sometimes two younger, attendant males with sexual behaviour being an important part of the social dynamic. Same-sex relations are common and frequent in both sexes, with Asiatic elephants in captivity devoting roughly 45% of sexual encounters to same-sex activity. Giraffes - Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two males giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax. Such interactions between males have been found to be more frequent than heterosexual coupling. Bonobo - A matriarchal society (unusual amongst apes), Bonobos are a fully bisexual species -- both males and females engage in heterosexual and homosexual behavior, being noted for lesbianism in particular. About 60% of all sexual activity in this species is between two or more females. While the homosexual bonding system in Bonobos represent the highest frequency of homosexuality known in any species, homosexuality has been reported for all great apes (a group which includes humans), as well as a number of other primate species. Do I need to continue?

Mazda followed by Nissan followed by Chevy.

"It" is natural. "It" occurs in many species. "It" occurs in every society in every time.

Please list the "legit" reasons to oppose it.

What is "gay propaganda"?

I'm not one of those people who is stuck on the word "marriage" on a government level. I DON'T want homosexual civil unions if heterosexuals get separate laws in marriage, but I would take civil union if that is what was offered to heterosexuals also. Basically, whichever law that allows me to legally bond with my partner should be the same law that allows a heterosexual couple to be joined.

and this thread is done.

Some of you are going to hate the comparisons I'm about to make, but work with me here. Honda Accord coupe V6 - 19/29 - 271hp Honda Accord coupe I4 - 21/30 - 190hp Nissan Altima coupe V6 - 19/26 - 270hp Nissan Altima coupe I4 - 23/31 - 175hp Hyundai Genesis coupe V6 - 20/29 - 210hp Hyundai Genesis coupe i4 - 18/26 - 300hp BMW 3-series coupe I6 - 17/26 - 300hp Toyota Solara coupe V6 - 18/26 - 210hp Toyota Solara coupe I4 - 22/31 - 155hp at 3,300lbs.... ahahahahah. Chevy Camaro coupe V6 - 18/29 - 300hp.... with the Camaro, you quite literally can have your cake and eat it too.

Read it another way. 12,000 Pontiacs were sold because people preferred the styling, name, whatever over what many on this board consider to be superior cars. Every retail Pontiac G6 sale happens when someone prefers the G6 over the Malibu, Aura, Accord, Altima, Camry, Sonata, or Galant.

but that's because you don't even like the intentions of this segment. No manufacturer, ever, could build something compelling for you in this segment because it's the segment that bothers you, not the vehicles specifically. Try to look at it through a suburban housewife's point of view. She really wanted an H3, but it's kinda out of her price range with the economy and all and she's worried that the price of gas will go back up. Does she settle for a bar of soap CRV or does she get the Terrain that looks almost as butch as an H3, more expensive than an Equinox, and gets 30mph highway? How about the guy who is downsizing from his Yukon because of gas prices but thinks the Acadia is too "mini-van". He's not looking for a real off-roader, but he wants something tough looking to beef up what he's lacking in the groin area. Can you really see someone like that getting into a Murano? Then there is the young professional. She lost her job at the brokerage, but she landed on her feet at a new place pretty quickly. The pay isn't as good, but she'll get by as long as she can get out of the payments on her LR3. She wants something upscale. There's no way she's getting into an Equinox or Vue, she'd never be caught dead in something as low rung as a Chevy or Saturn. She doesn't want another VW because of all the trouble with the one she had in college. GMC has some respect and it's a tough looking vehicle. Gets decent mileage too. A Denali version would be a great fit here. Face it, this vehicle was never intended to be marketed to a curmudgeon living in the woods with his dogs.

The terrain is no more of a rebadge than the H2 is of the Tahoe.

+1

I actually *really* like it. I'd never own one myself, but it is a butch looking entry in a rather feminine segment. I think it'll do well for that reason alone. Again, don't think about it from the "would I buy it" perspective, think about it from the perspective of "would the typical buyer in this segment like it?"

Alimony Child support prenuptial agreements Divorce can also ruin your credit Further more, it is a way of designating certain rights to your spouse that are very very very difficult to challenge in court.

oh man that is a hot Toro!

I'm saying that I have the right to have my exclusive contract with someone of the same gender treated equally as if I had an exclusive contract with someone of the opposite gender.