Judge rejects divorce for transgender pregnant man

TXgolfer said:
It's not a question, it is a statement. You are viewing the issue through a narrow scope. MEANING, you are not looking at the entire picture. This is why I suggested that we move on. :)
Click to expand...

Telling Foxrac how he is thinking is a form of control. Moving on...
 
Reba said:
Let me get this straight.

They want a same-sex marriage so they can have a same-sex divorce.

:dizzy:
Click to expand...

And......

Black and whites weren't allowed to marry...now we are allowed to marry and we are allowed to have a back/white divorce.

Maybe I should contact my lawyer to pull up the divorce papers so I can have a black/white divorce from my black hubby.

Silly, isn't it?

Now, think what you are saying.

Others with a different point of view would think that comment is silly or even judgemental.....their call.
 
shel90 said:
And......

Black and whites weren't allowed to marry...now we are allowed to marry and we are allowed to have a back/white divorce.

Maybe I should contact my lawyer to pull up the divorce papers so I can have a black/white divorce from my black hubby.

Silly, isn't it?

Now, think what you are saying.

Others with a different point of view would think that comment is silly or even judgemental.....their call.
Click to expand...

Apples to Oranges.
 
diehardbiker said:
The problem is, judges are required to make decisions based whats written in the law books. If Judges can't find anything in reference in the law books, he/she can not make any decision and had to throw it away. You see, "Not recognized" means it has not found anything in the law book.

If Judges didn't follow the book, then these judges stand risk on losing their job EVEN if they were voted for.

In order to fix these kinds of problem, contact your local congress and inform them your concern. Congress is the one that can fix the law and re write the law book. Judges can't do that.
Click to expand...


surely he/she knew this was going to happen...you do your research before embarking on something like this...not to sound cynical maybe he/she going to make bit of money with her story,the lawyers and media have
 
diehardbiker said:
The problem is, judges are required to make decisions based whats written in the law books. If Judges can't find anything in reference in the law books, he/she can not make any decision and had to throw it away. You see, "Not recognized" means it has not found anything in the law book.

If Judges didn't follow the book, then these judges stand risk on losing their job EVEN if they were voted for.

In order to fix these kinds of problem, contact your local congress and inform them your concern. Congress is the one that can fix the law and re write the law book. Judges can't do that.
Click to expand...

That's exception of US Supreme Court - they can declare the law that pass by the congress or state legislature as constitutional or unconstitutional.
 
You don't get it, seems many people don't get it. If there is nothing written in law book, what can the judges do?

Where do you think books gets their law written from? Supreme court? Your funny! Supreme court does the decision where the law that is wrote in book that is not clear enough to the public, or verify new laws created by congress whether its constitutional or not. They (supreme court) don't make laws, just an interpreter for the law books. Who wrote the law books? It is Congress!

If there are disagreements or there may be proposal of new law that needs to write, the best path is to contact your local congress, because they represent you as American citizen and make proposal on the congress floor, then vote yea or nay.

So, what I think had happened, perhaps on purpose by congress which "Okay about same sex marriage" and wrote it in the law. But did they re-write the divorce law to include same sex marriage to get divorced? I think, it never happened. I think that is where the problem is. So in order to fix or re-write the divorce law in your state, contact your state representative.

I wish I can elaborate what I have seen and heard and I am trying to explain a story without breaking confidential information. Friend of mine didn't know that it is a felony which he had committed. DA showed him in the law book, and explain what that means. DA said, can not make exception on that part because it was very clear written so no way to drop the charge. DA even blunt with him that judge can not bend the law that is written in the book. It was his major mistake and didn't know this until too late. He ended up with few years in jail. I know he didn't mean that but, it is the law.

I have another case, and don't want to share due to conflict of interest with few parties that I have with. And yes, I have been in court room several times. And no, I am not criminal, just both Juror and being plaintiff as well. I even observed several defendants in the court room trying to find way around the law, usually they failed cause judge tend to be blunt. It is YES or NO, nothing else and that is the way it is.

Foxrac said:
That's exception of US Supreme Court - they can declare the law that pass by the congress or state legislature as constitutional or unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
 
Here is perfect example.

Say there was two sex offenders who committed same kind of crime

John Smith committed 1st degree rape in 1993

Scott Smith committed 1st degree rape in 1996

Both were captured in 1998 and had to go court, both at same time but different court room.

Both crimes were identical, no difference and yes both have same amount of sentence, say 15 years in prison.

move forward, they both just released few weeks ago.

Do you know what are the difference in consequence for committing 1st degree rape between 1993 and 1996?

Both of felons released recently, what do John Smith required after release from prison? Answer is NOTHING, yes seriously NOTHING. While what Scott Smith is required after release from prison? Of course, register sex offender registry.

Why John don't have to register while Scott is required to? The answer is clear, there was no requirement for sex offender to register after serve their time though 1993 law book, judge had to follow 1993 law book which does not contain sex offender registry requirements while Scott is required to register because 1996 law book has language where convicted sex offender is required to register sex offender registry.

Congress passed and president signed that law in 1994, and the effective year was 1995. So, that is why sex offenders committed before 1995 isn't required to register.. Sucks isn't it? Can Judge do anything about it? Nope. I would love ask congress to pass law to have that sex offender registry requirement retroactive and apply to all sex offender regardless of year committing such crime.

I know I got off the point but my point is, it depends on what judge read in the law book, they (Judges) do not decide themselves without using law books.
 
natural juctice punishment period....law is hugh books lawyers fighting it out plea bargins and the example you given.....if someone raped any of my dearest it be chop no more said natural juctice given
 
i not relgious but i give old god his due some of them ten commandments still hold firm but not all of them
 
Oh, I don't think it is good idea to tie political and religious together. With due respect for all of religious, government should not be in favor in one of religious group and should stay neutral and out of their beliefs. That is one of reason why we have freedom of religious. Favoritism is very dangerous territory.
 
Wow, you are misunderstood my post.

I NEVER say that US Supreme Court write a law for us, so my point is... they have authority to rule whatever laws are constitutional or unconstitutional.

The divorce is usually state issue, I believe so.

diehardbiker said:
You don't get it, seems many people don't get it. If there is nothing written in law book, what can the judges do?

Where do you think books gets their law written from? Supreme court? Your funny! Supreme court does the decision where the law that is wrote in book that is not clear enough to the public, or verify new laws created by congress whether its constitutional or not. They (supreme court) don't make laws, just an interpreter for the law books. Who wrote the law books? It is Congress!

If there are disagreements or there may be proposal of new law that needs to write, the best path is to contact your local congress, because they represent you as American citizen and make proposal on the congress floor, then vote yea or nay.

So, what I think had happened, perhaps on purpose by congress which "Okay about same sex marriage" and wrote it in the law. But did they re-write the divorce law to include same sex marriage to get divorced? I think, it never happened. I think that is where the problem is. So in order to fix or re-write the divorce law in your state, contact your state representative.

I wish I can elaborate what I have seen and heard and I am trying to explain a story without breaking confidential information. Friend of mine didn't know that it is a felony which he had committed. DA showed him in the law book, and explain what that means. DA said, can not make exception on that part because it was very clear written so no way to drop the charge. DA even blunt with him that judge can not bend the law that is written in the book. It was his major mistake and didn't know this until too late. He ended up with few years in jail. I know he didn't mean that but, it is the law.

I have another case, and don't want to share due to conflict of interest with few parties that I have with. And yes, I have been in court room several times. And no, I am not criminal, just both Juror and being plaintiff as well. I even observed several defendants in the court room trying to find way around the law, usually they failed cause judge tend to be blunt. It is YES or NO, nothing else and that is the way it is.
Click to expand...
 
TXgolfer said:
No. In this case it was merely explaining the difference in opinion.
Click to expand...

Your explanation is very, very confusing and I can't understand about what are you saying.

My post #8 is still valid - no change in my opinion.

It is best to leave my post intact if you can't bring to agree or try to make me to understand instead of having many post argument - that will NEVER make me to accept your opinion claim.
 
OMG this is like making my brain melt. SO....they couldn't get a divorce in Arizona because their marriage isn't recognized there anyway. Okay fine, so problem solved, you don't want to be married well apparently you're not married so don't worry about it.

BUT, what if one of them moved to a different state, one where their marriage is recognized, and they meet someone else and want to get married. If the marriage they tried to dissolve but couldn't is recognized in that state would that mean that they couldn't marry this new person until they were truly divorced??

Holy crap that's just so confusing.
 
ambrosia said:
OMG this is like making my brain melt. SO....they couldn't get a divorce in Arizona because their marriage isn't recognized there anyway. Okay fine, so problem solved, you don't want to be married well apparently you're not married so don't worry about it.

BUT, what if one of them moved to a different state, one where their marriage is recognized, and they meet someone else and want to get married. If the marriage they tried to dissolve but couldn't is recognized in that state would that mean that they couldn't marry this new person until they were truly divorced??

Holy crap that's just so confusing.
Click to expand...

Happens a lot even with hetero marriages to. People move, the state they reside in has different laws tan the state they were married in. I had a friend whose wife left him and went to live in another state. Neither filed for over a year hoping they would work things out. They didn't, and then the wife filed in her new state. It was a huge mess.
 
Foxrac said:
Your explanation is very, very confusing and I can't understand about what are you saying.

My post #8 is still valid - no change in my opinion.

It is best to leave my post intact if you can't bring to agree or try to make me to understand instead of having many post argument - that will NEVER make me to accept your opinion claim.
Click to expand...

There was no argument. The point was that we were looking at things from different perspectives. You were looking at the issue with a very narrow scope, focused only on one case and one part of the case. I was focused on the big picture.
 
Back
Top