Fags are the new ******s.

[MJW]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Proposition 8 won because of a variety of factors, and blaming minorities for it won't really help.

A few months ago, polls showed it losing by a wide margin--17 points or so. Opponents got complacent and donations to fighting it dried up as the presidential election sucked all the air out of the room.

Then the LDS dropped massive money into the pro-8 campaign, funding an incredibly sleazy ad campaign that specifically targeted minority areas with misinformation, including the claim that not passing 8 would allow homosexuals to teach school children about gay sex and that Obama was actually in favor of 8, which he was not.

It wasn't until polling was conducted relatively recently showing Prop 8 winning that opponents woke up and by then it was just too damn late.

If there's a silver lining, it's that this decision likely won't last long. You can guarantee that if legal challenges don't kill it, the whole mess will be back on the ballot in the next election.

Five years ago prop 8 would pass easily. Five years from now (at most) the change that will roll back prop 8 will pass easily.

[MJW]

Originally posted by Darius871


How could legal challenges possibly strike down an amendment referendum? Only the USSC could supersede a state constitution, unless there's some obscure technicality I'm not aware of.

The gays are saying that this change to the state's consistuion are not mere amendments. Therefore there is no way to use ballots to change it like that. However, things like this have all happened before. The agrument that the gays are using has lost everytime.

If the want gay marrige that Cal. Court will have to use the US consitution. Then it will have to go up to the Suprume Court.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by MJW
Winning by out-voting the other side does not show if you are right or wrong.

Thanks for providing logic as to why Proposition 8 isn't right.

If society gets to a point that it decides that gay rights are indeed "right," what else is there to say they're "wrong?" Archaic Middle Eastern books?

[MJW]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Thanks for providing logic as to why Proposition 8 isn't right.

If society gets to a point that it decides that gay rights are indeed "right," what else is there to say they're "wrong?" Archaic Middle Eastern books?

Right and wrong really don't exist.

[Imran Siddiqui]

They don't exist objectively.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Darius871
How could legal challenges possibly strike down an amendment referendum? Only the USSC could supersede a state constitution, unless there's some obscure technicality I'm not aware of.

The challenge will be that the ballot initiative was improper and has no power to do what it says it does, because such a change to the state's constitution would require a revision, not just an amendment.

The California Supreme Court in allowing same-sex marriage called it an "essential right" guaranteed by the state constitution. As such, according to the challenge, a mere amendment isn't enough to deprive citizens of an essential right.

The difference is significant, as a revision to the state constitution would first require legislative approval of 2/3rds, and then approval by the electorate of 2/3rds.

The challenge was brought up before, but the California supreme court declined to hear it. But that was because the proposition had not yet passed, so the court was not inclined to weigh in on something that wasn't yet law and might not be so anyway.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by MJW
Right and wrong really don't exist.

Sure they do, they're just not dictated by fiat from invisible beings on desert mountain tops.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Sure they do, they're just not dictated by fiat from invisible beings on desert mountain tops.

Nope. They're dictated by fiat from black-robed beings behind a bench of fine mahogany.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut


Nope. They're dictated by fiat from black-robed beings behind a bench of fine mahogany.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
They don't exist objectively.

I'm quite sure you don't understand what that means.

[-Jrabbit]

The gut-level reaction that people have for the term "marriage" is an emotional sticking-point, even for otherwise reasonable people.

I think the SCOTUS made its feeling about "separate but equal" treatment exceedingly clear in the area of civil rights. I don't see how this issue is any different. There's no logical reason to differentiate marriage by sexual preference. The only practical difference is the ability to produce progeny by, um, conventional methods. And frankly, an awful lot of couples I know are physically challenged in that area anyway.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Proposition 8 won because of a variety of factors, and blaming minorities for it won't really help.

A few months ago, polls showed it losing by a wide margin--17 points or so. Opponents got complacent and donations to fighting it dried up as the presidential election sucked all the air out of the room.

Then the LDS dropped massive money into the pro-8 campaign, funding an incredibly sleazy ad campaign that specifically targeted minority areas with misinformation, including the claim that not passing 8 would allow homosexuals to teach school children about gay sex and that Obama was actually in favor of 8, which he was not.

It wasn't until polling was conducted relatively recently showing Prop 8 winning that opponents woke up and by then it was just too damn late.

If there's a silver lining, it's that this decision likely won't last long. You can guarantee that if legal challenges don't kill it, the whole mess will be back on the ballot in the next election.

It's hard to see legal challenges winning since it is an amendment to the state constitution so they'd have to claim something about the amendment process violated the state constitution. That just isn't very likely.

Will it show up on the ballot again? Sure, but we'll likely have to wait until a few more old timers croak before it will actually pass.

[chequita guevara]

They could claim it violates the U.S. Constitution.

[MrFun]

The alliance between bigoted liberals and bigoted conservatives on social issues needs to be broken up ASAP.

Anyone have ideas on how to go about this? Education efforts? Illustrating the hypocrisy of homophobic blacks on civil rights issues?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Darius871
How could legal challenges possibly strike down an amendment referendum? Only the USSC could supersede a state constitution, unless there's some obscure technicality I'm not aware of.

Here's the thing. Except for minor alterations to the California Constitution, amendments must be done by way of revision. There's only two ways to revise the California Constitution: (1) in a Constitutional Convention and (2) by 2/3 of the Leglislature submitting the matter to the public for a vote. A voter initiative is NOT available.

So, Prop 8 is unconstitutional.