Same-sex marriage coming to Utah

[Jeff Lebowski]

Steve Young weighs in:

http://blog.affirmation.org/2013/12/...ope-and-faith/

[SoonerCoug]

LOL. Patent law is so complex that it's somehow a difficult question whether you should be able to patent a gene or not. Patenting a gene is like patenting noses, ears, hands, and feet. Only the law could make this an issue. I cannot tell you how stupid it is that Myriad was allowed to patent a gene.

You don't need to apologize to lawyers, as you insulted medicine and science by your rant. You may understand your area of expertise very well, I don't know or have the insights necessary to scrutinize that. However, you lack a broader perspective, your Hinckley scholarship notwithstanding. You do possess the God complex sometimes contracted by issuance of the MD degree.

Each profession has its own set of failings, parameters of expertise and purpose. Law is used by society to regulate its conduct using principles available to it to discern "social" truth. It is not designed to pursue scientific or even moral truth. Patent law is very complex as it endeavors to regulate inventions, processes and devices in light of novelty and addition by the inventor. The gene patents are even more difficult because discovered scientific processes are difficult for the law to deal with. Society has an interest in monetizing anything which can be put into the commerce. On the flip side, matters in the public domain don't receive protection.

All America probably understands the complexity of the legal struggles to address these concerns very well. These are matters of social and economic concerns which are the purview of the law.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

Steve Barb Young weighs in:

http://blog.affirmation.org/2013/12/...ope-and-faith/

More accurately.

[UVACoug]

I wonder how the state would have done had it not elected a corrupt Attorney General who left the office in shambles. I doubt they would have faired much better, but it does make the whole thing that much more delicious.

The current A.G.'s office is completely incompetent. They have no clue what they are doing. Tarbet is making a fool of himself filing all kinds of motions that don't make any sense trying to stop the marriages. Doesn't make him look like a very good choice to be Swallow's permanent replacement.

[Topper]

LOL. Patent law is so complex that it's somehow a difficult question whether you should be able to patent a gene or not. Patenting a gene is like patenting noses, ears, hands, and feet. Only the law could make this an issue. I cannot tell you how stupid it is that Myriad was allowed to patent a gene.

You are using your personal, discombobbled value system to diminish what society has judged long before you. It does not comport with your value system. It is not a stupid decision.

The law is balancing science and economics. The law is not requesting this, commerce is. You forget the first rule of law, follow the money. It is obvious you have limited understanding of the world. Stick to research and allow others to make economic and social decisions. You are ill-equipped to enter that arena.

[Jeff Lebowski]

More accurately.

Yeah most likely. Either way.

[UVACoug]

Oh brother.

Where am I wrong? Shelby doesn't have a magic wand he can use to change the entire system. There is a process for these things.

[CardiacCoug]

Where am I wrong?

Discrimination against gay people.

[Uncle Ted]

I'm happy to say that I did not vote for Amendemnet 3. I could have voted for it and I'm sure MJ did, but it's nice to know I didn't. My brother also didn't vote for it and he got a big lecture from his inlaws, who are from Cali, probably since it came after prop 22 or whatever Cali did before prop 8.

I'm happy to say that both my wife and I didn't vote for either Utah's amendment 3 or Cali's prop 8.

So looking the history of Utah's Amendment 3 it looks like 82% of Utah county voted for it... more than any other county in the state:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Co...al_Amendment_3

[smokymountainrain]

He doesn't.

I apologize for the late response here, but even if these marriages are eventually invalidated after appeal, there are employers out there who recognize same-sex spouses for benefits purposes, for example. There is at least one very large employer in the state of Utah that will not retroactively disallow those marriages in the event they are invalidated by the state.

[pellegrino]

Where am I wrong? Shelby doesn't have a magic wand he can use to change the entire system. There is a process for these things.

then please elaborate as to what should have happened in the wake of his ruling invalidating the law.

[SoonerCoug]

You are using your personal, discombobbled value system to diminish what society has judged long before you. It does not comport with your value system. It is not a stupid decision.

The law is balancing science and economics. The law is not requesting this, commerce is. You forget the first rule of law, follow the money. It is obvious you have limited understanding of the world. Stick to research and allow others to make economic and social decisions. You are ill-equipped to enter that arena.

The existence of something is not science. Discovering that something exists doesn't justify a patent. You can't patent a planet.

[Non Sequitur]

Steve Young weighs in:

http://blog.affirmation.org/2013/12/...ope-and-faith/

I saw 3 different posts on CB linking that. All three disappeared within minutes. That made me chuckle.

[SoonerCoug]

I saw 3 different posts on CB linking that. All three disappeared within minutes. That made me chuckle.

El Jefe should burn in hell.

[UVACoug]

then please elaborate as to what should have happened in the wake of his ruling invalidating the law.

First of all, the only law that was invalidated was a law banning the legislature from permitting same sex marriage. The only thing the decision does, then, is allow the legislature to allow same-sex marriage (which it really has no interest in doing right now). If the plaintiffs want to force the state to issue marriage licenses, then they have to challenge the statute that prohibits the county clerks from providing them and seek an injunction from the federal court mandating that licenses be issued. Neither of those things have happened yet ... and there is no reason why they necessarily would. If Judge Shelby got the case that sought those remedies, he would almost certainly grant them and require the clerks to grant licenses. His decision in the Amendment 3 case is NOT precedential though, so if any of the other District of Utah judges got the case they could ignore his ruling all together.

There is a process for this stuff. It's not enough to just say "discrimination of gays is wrong" and expect everything else to fall in line.