Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Anice Parker's says pastors shouldn't get a jury.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    day/month/year makes more sense than month/day/year. The first is in order of unit length, whereas the latter is pure yank chaos.
    Year/month/day makes more sense for electronic filing, particularly in naming conventions of documents.

    Leave a comment:


  • Leonhard
    replied
    Originally posted by phank View Post
    As the conservative opponents are well aware (and make this abundently clear), the question isn't whether the ordinance is legal, but rather whether it is popular.
    Actually no, the question is whether enough votes were gathered for possible repealing of it, at least ballotting such a possibility as far as I understand it. Nobody disputes that its unpopular in that region, it clearly wasn't by the activity its generated.

    After all, the ordinance applies at the very most to a small handful of people, who already have enough problems.
    Actually the ordinance applies to everyone, since it changes the definition of what's required for you to be present in public bathrooms of a particular gender indentificate. I do have quite a bit sympathy for transgenders, even as a traditional catholic, perhaps far more than you realise. However I think that this ordinance could have been better, and since its been opened as wide as possible, all but making public bathrooms unisex, there are legitimate questions to ask about it.

    Since it applies to all bathrooms, it applies to quite a few people.

    The change from a bench trial to a jury trial effectively causes the ordinance to hinge on the jury selection process, rather than anything particularly legal. And any competent lawyer can find a dozen pro-discrimination conservatives in Houston.
    The same could be said for Anisse Parker just happening to find a person to review the evidence who'd end the court in her favor.

    Leave a comment:


  • phank
    replied
    As the conservative opponents are well aware (and make this abundently clear), the question isn't whether the ordinance is legal, but rather whether it is popular. After all, the ordinance applies at the very most to a small handful of people, who already have enough problems. The change from a bench trial to a jury trial effectively causes the ordinance to hinge on the jury selection process, rather than anything particularly legal. And any competent lawyer can find a dozen pro-discrimination conservatives in Houston.

    After which the ordinance will be tossed out, and this small handful of unfortunate people won't be any worse off than ever. And few people in Houston will ever meet anyone who has ever met anyone who knows anyone who knows any of the people the ordinance applied to anyway. This whole kerfuffle has nothing to do with them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    This will now go to a Jury for resolution.

    Source: Houston Chronicle

    A state district judge ruled Tuesday that the lawsuit surrounding the city's embattled equal rights ordinance will go before a jury trial rather than a bench trial, a decision that conservative opponents of the law are hailing as a major victory.

    Critics suing the city over its equal rights ordinance had been pushing for the case to go before a jury, a move Mayor Annise Parker's administration said was not in compliance with state election law.

    Judge Robert Schaffer issued a brief decision late Tuesday afternoon, one week before the trial is set to begin. Schaffer's order denied the city's request for a bench trial, a response to the plaintiffs' earlier filing for a jury trial.

    © Copyright Original Source

    Leave a comment:


  • Pentecost
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Here is another source for the story: Houston, We Still Have a Problem: Lesbian Mayor at It Again. Its from "CharismaNews" which also publishes a monthly magazine out of Florida called Charisma which appears to be primarily directed toward Pentecostals and charismatics.
    As a regular (if not always proud) reader of Charisma I can confirm it is oriented towards us, and even has "shock" articles where the author brings up more cessationist claims about for example tongues and the author "exposes" the "rediculousness" of those beliefs. But it is where I get most of my Christian news.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedidiah
    replied
    Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
    I always write or say day, month, and full year. Month as in January, February, etc.
    But that takes away all the chance for confusion. What is the fun in that?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedidiah
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    day/month/year makes more sense than month/day/year. The first is in order of unit length, whereas the latter is pure yank chaos.
    What is wrong with a little chaos?

    Leave a comment:


  • DesertBerean
    replied
    I always write or say day, month, and full year. Month as in January, February, etc.

    But... OFF TOPIC!

    Leave a comment:


  • JonathanL
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Because great is not normal, right? Right? Why are you rolling your eyes?


    I'd say it's weird rather than great.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post


    You're a great fellow, but that's definitely not normal.
    Because great is not normal, right? Right? Why are you rolling your eyes?

    Leave a comment:


  • JonathanL
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    . . .us normal folks would write 1/10/2014 (or 1-10-2014). . .


    You're a great fellow, but that's definitely not normal.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    There, they're, their.

    Leave a comment:


  • phank
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    For file naming conventions, year/mo/day makes more sense, where you start the filename YYYY-MM-DD-filename.
    This makes things easier to find, for sure. Start with the unit of largest granularity and work down.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    day/month/year makes more sense than month/day/year. The first is in order of unit length, wheresa the latter is pure yank chaos.
    For file naming conventions, year/mo/day makes more sense, where you start the filename YYYY-MM-DD-filename.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Just like the cads like to mix up the order of months and dates when given numerically. For instance for January 10, 2014 us normal folks would write 1/10/2014 (or 1-10-2014) whereas those nogoodniks insist on writing 10/1/2014.

    Its a conspiracy I tells ya [ATTACH=CONFIG]3436[/ATTACH]
    day/month/year makes more sense than month/day/year. The first is in order of unit length, whereas the latter is pure yank chaos.
    Last edited by Darth Executor; 01-10-2015, 10:27 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 06:58 PM
1 response
20 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 06:52 PM
20 responses
92 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Gondwanaland, Yesterday, 06:04 PM
1 response
17 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 12-03-2021, 07:16 PM
33 responses
146 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Cow Poke, 12-03-2021, 07:15 PM
7 responses
41 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Working...
X