In this GD thread in October of 2006, we discussed the then-pending Virginia legislation that would basically duplicate DOMA: Virginia would not recognize any marriage except as between a man and a woman.
Steve MB opposed the legislation for reasons that included his belief that, if passed, the scheme would undermine domestic violence protections between unmarried couples:
After not quite a year passed, I opened a thread asking Steve MB if he now agreed that his prediction was incorrect. Some folks in that thread thought I should just let it go – what, did I need to be right all the time or something? Others pointed out that in the original thread we had discussed one and two year time frames, and not even one year had passed, so, technically, Steve MB wasn’t even wrong yet by the terms set in the original thread. Still others asked me to prove, somehow, that no such cases had been filed. Not really sure how to do that: it’s easy to prove a case exists, by citing the case. But apart from simply representing that you’ve looked and can’t find any, there doesn’t seem to be any way to prove a case doesn’t exist.
So. Here we are in 2010. More than THREE years have passed since that discussion. I follow both the mainstream press and the Virginia Lawyer’s Weekly pretty religiously. I have also searched, in vain, all the reported domestic violence cases in Virginia, and I have not found one single instance of the Virginia DOMA law being used to avoid prosecution for domestic violence. I can’t even find any evidence of the “extra wringer” Steve MB spoke of.
So I’m now going to ask again: Steve MB, do you now concede you might have been the tiniest bit mistaken when you insisted that Virginia’s DOMA would result in the loss of any protections for victims of domestic violence?
Of course, of course. I should let people make outrageous predictions to buttress their side in debate, and never call them on it after those those predictions don’t come to pass.
Because making them admit their claims were outrageous is to be a dick.
Hey, fighting ignorance! Good we all are for that, though. Eh?
Well, the only reason the post exists is because of a chain of events starting with Bricker feeling the need to defend a “no boys kissing” law, which is prima facie evidence of being a dick, so there’s at least that much.
Your position seriously is that these sorts of things should simply be left alone?
See, that seems weird to me. It seems like someone can offer up crazy scare scenarios arguing against a proposal and then safely expect never to be held accountable for those scenarios never actually coming to pass.
My position seriously is that these sorts of things should simply be left alone.
Follow the link I posted. It’s making fun of you.
It’s okay for someone to be wrong on the Internet. Obsessing over past fish that got away, posting about it (twice!) is beyond over the top.
Maybe you’re Brickrolling again and there’s some sort of trap you’re setting up to Gotcha Ya on a wider point. If so, have your fun.
If you like searching on your username for signs that someone posted a crazy scare scenario arguing against a proposal, that must be a pretty boring day job. If you must be the Internet Sheriff holding people accountable for scenarios that never come to pass, well, you must have a pretty unfulfilling day job.
There are all sorts of situations that revisiting some long ago point might make sense. This makes sense too–just re-read the linked cartoon.
I’m not entirely sure why this thread was created, since from the looks of it, you admit to having opened up another thread a year after the event to chide SteveMB. Did he continue to maintain his position or something?
From the outside, this looks like beating a dead horse.
Yes, he did. In that thread, if I recall, he said there was no leeway for a few weeks early; his point, so far as I could determine, was that a year had not yet gone by and so I had no room to declare victory.
Again: that seems weird to me. It seems like someone can offer up crazy scare scenarios arguing against a proposal and then safely expect never to be held accountable for those scenarios never actually coming to pass.
But I guess you’re right, and it doesn’t matter, especially in view of the fact that allowing Pelosi and the Democrats to retain control of the White House after 2010 will lead to massive economic failures followed by widespread nationalization of key industries. It’s literally certain. Trust me.
I bet computers really helped your filing system. It must have been a bitch keeping track of every conversation, cross-referenced by participant and subject matter. Now you can keep track of a great many more details and different status (I was right, still open, followed-up, etc.).
Again, follow thislink. Study it. You might glean some insight. Keep staring at it until you see the patheticism of calling him out twice over three years to make sure everyone knows you’re right–or more compulsively, that he was wrong. Keep staring until you see there’s some line between arguing a point and calling people out on such a relatively minor points after so much time. Keep staring, starrrrrinnnnnggggg STTTTAAARRRRRIINNNNGGGG…
The fact that his prediction turned out (so far) to be wrong does not make it outrageous.
Not only did he have specific incidents in Ohio to inform his argument (incidents based on legal wordings very similar to those of Virginia), but there were quite a lot of journalists and political commentators at the time who worried about exactly the same thing. Stories in the Washington Post from 2006 quote lawyers, and the Governor of the state, voicing similar concerns, although they also quote other lawyers disagreeing.
You might be right that this hasn’t come to pass, and this might mean that Steve MB was wrong, but to call the prediction “outrageous” seems a bit over the top.
Also, my question to you would be: have you found any instance where someone accused of domestic violence in Virginia attempts to use the 2006 amendment to avoid prosecution? Because if you haven’t then it means the courts have not yet been forced to decide on the issue. And you well know, as a lawyer, that we often don’t really know what the courts will do until an actual case comes before them.
Your argument here would be more definitive if you could show a case where a domestic violence defendant attempted to use the amendment to avoid prosecution, and was denied by the court.
No. The wording of Ohio’s statutes was different, and that was a point I raised at the time in this post, which quotes from each statute and explains clearly how the Virginia law would not permit the result.
On the contrary – it was precise and exact to call it outrageous. It was a reading supported by nothing but wild speculation, offered up by opponents of the law who evidently believed the actual arguments were not sufficient opposition. It was an interpretation offered only by those who were fighting against the law. Not one disinterested legal observer thought that the scare-tactic outcome was possible.
Wow.
Yeah, there’s another possibility: no defendant has raised the issue because it is absolutely, clearly, and utterly outside the bounds of the law. I will also note that my research has no uncovered any instance of a domestic violence defendant claiming he’s not guilty because a voodoo curse forced him to hit his wife, but I can nonetheless boldly state that we DO know how the courts would treat such a claim.
And in fact, the total absence of any such attempts is a point in my favor. Think of all the different domestic violence defendants in Virgina in the past three years. Are we to believe that, if such a defense was tenable, that not ONE of their lawyers decided to roll the dice and give it a try?
Does anybody else imagine Bricker-of-three-years-ago cackling with maniacal glee as he sets a recurring anniversary reminder on his calendar?
I gotta say, while I think **B **can be an annoying, pedantic, stubborn, disingenuous asshole some of the time, his perseverance here gets a solid thumbs-up from me. Although it would have been funnier if the thread had ended with **Bricker **chasing **Steve MB **down a crowded street, screaming, “WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?!”