Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Any ethical landlord will charge an app fee per adult. And I do believe California Fair Housing states that ALL adults to live in the unit must fill out, and pay for, a separate application..
In all the apartments and houses I looked at, the application fee was always "Per Adult or married couple". Each adult had to fill out the application, but the costs were always "Per adult or married couple". If you could, can you show me where California prohibits this? ((I'm rather curious))
Moderator cut: Public discussion of moderation
First, I don't support state recognition of any marriage, as it's a religious institution, even if you think it's secular, it's not.. But if there is state recognition of marriage, then it should be extended to gays as well.
However, the court blundered here applying the rational basis standard, which is the lowest standard. The distinction/classification must stand, using this standard unless there is no possible rational reason for it. The judge must even consider bases for the standard that the proponents of the classification did not raise. So if they only raised moral or religious things, while a judge can justly rule those are not rational bases for the distinction, there ARE rational bases for it. One would be cost cutting. Marriage confers benefits, like tax benefits, that would hurt state coffers, especially in times of deficits. It also means that survivors would get social security benefits, further dipping into the already over stretched funds. You may not like it, but it is a rational basis for not allowing it.
What I would argue, is that homosexuals should get intermediate scrutiny, a higher level of protection, but the courts only give them the rational basis standard, and under that, the court should have said that prop 8 meets the rational basis standard.
The Judicial system is there to put limits on the "will of the people" when the acts of the "people" are outside the limits of the Constitution. This is the primary function of the Federal Judiciary.
The "people" are NOT always right.
Agreed. The government needs to stay out of the marriage issue and quit denying people their rights as citizens.
I don't see how this judge could be unbiased on this issue. Crazy.
I would assume you'd say the same thing if it was a straight judge who ruled the opposite way??
Either way, read his proceedings. The conservatives have been ripping the thing to shreds, all 130 pages of it or whatever - and it's extremely solid and clear cut. He did his job.
If you think he's biased, prove it, don't just say it cause he's gay.
The world, bless it, is round.........not flat. You don't get into heaven by paying alms to the church of god; you don't go blind by masturbating; you don't fall off the edge if you go west; gravity draws things to the ground from height, not the holy one; AIDS is not a gay disease; it's ok to call jesus out; the earth turns around the sun, not the other way around; eve did not spring from a rib; miracles do exist and desiring a physical relationship with a member of the same sex is not anything but fun.
Posted for those who don't know anything yet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
