prop 8 upheld by ca. supreme court

[slurper_la]

YouTube - Ted Olson & David Boies Team Up To Overturn Gay Marriage Ban In California

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUlDZLZ1Gls

The Olson/Boies Challenge to California's Proposition 8: A High-Risk Effort

 

[blg3floor3]

This is disappointing. I thought we had progressed farther than this as a society, especially considering the last 50, or even 20 years, but I guess not. Maybe it's all just smoke, mirrors and bullshit. I just don't understand how it's not blatantly obvious to everyone out there that sexual orientation should be a federally protected civil right just like all the other civil rights. Gender, ethnicity, nationality (by birth) generally aren't choices. Religion and other beliefs generally are. Yet both sets are protected civil rights. They help define who a person is and they are things everyone else just has to accept about a person, at least in legal matters. Regardless of whether someone believes sexual orientation is a choice or an innate biological property, I don't see how it isn't crystal clear to the entire society that it's a civil right like all the rest that should be protected and prevented from discrimination (such as allowing or disallowing legal marriage based on that orientation). Some civil rights are choices, others are innate. Since both types are protected, sexual orientation as a valid right shouldn't even be questioned. There shouldn't even be any debate about it. But I guess I far, far overestimated our progress and how open-minded society was.

And I guess people have just been putting their Politically Correct faces on in public, then putting their normal prejudicial, discriminatory faces back on at home. I also had no idea what DOMA was. Defense of Marriage Act? Are you fucking kidding me? They made a federal law to hogtie the government regarding recognizing the validity of same sex marriages?

Wow. Well, I guess we're still in the dark ages. I wonder how far, if at all, we'll have progressed by 2500. I wish I could be around to see.

 

[B_Enough_for_Me]

Amending the Constitution to negatively impact the civil rights of a minority is unconstitional you know.

That's why the thing will reach the Federal Level.

I must have missed that day in law school.

Homosexuals are not a suspect class, ie they are not a definable minority. Look at Romer v. Evans, City of Cleburne v. Cleburn Living Center, and Lawrence v. Texas. As long as the law in question, here an amendment (which will receive some deference), is rationally related to some legitimate end of government, it will stand. If homosexuals become a suspect class then the government must meet a much higher burden. Why? Suspect classes are based on inherant traits: race, nationality, age.

It is most likely that the courts will wait for the states to reach consensus before acting on the subject.

Our government, on any level, can discriminate, they just have to meet a very high burden in proving the necessity of their actions.

 

[Industrialsize]

I must have missed that day in law school.

Homosexuals are not a suspect class, ie they are not a definable minority. Look at Romer v. Evans, City of Cleburne v. Cleburn Living Center, and Lawrence v. Texas. As long as the law in question, here an amendment (which will receive some deference), is rationally related to some legitimate end of government, it will stand. If homosexuals become a suspect class then the government must meet a much higher burden. Why? Suspect classes are based on inherant traits: race, nationality, age.

It is most likely that the courts will wait for the states to reach consensus before acting on the subject.

Our government, on any level, can discriminate, they just have to meet a very high burden in proving the necessity of their actions.

Homosexuality IS an inherent trait.

 

[slurper_la]

I must have missed that day in law school.

Yes indeed you must have. Have you applied for a refund of your tuition yet because the balance of that alleged law education has failed you?

 

[faceking]

The religous wrong (most of them closeted but another topic!) will be taking this decision all over the country.

I notice how this sorta rhetoric drivels out EVERY time the same-sex marriage doesn't go the way of many of my friends.

Religion, religion, religion... with no knock on other compelling demographics on anti same-sex marriage constituencies... i.e. the VERY VERY swung African American community, Truman Democrats against same-sex marriage, and so folrth. Or... that totally misunderstood claim of "separation of church and state".

So convenient and fun to just blast the church... zzzzzzzz. I understand that some Christians/Catholics (most of my Roman Catholic cousins are all for same-sex marriage, FWIW) are the biggest proponents of Prop 8, but even Barrah Obama is a bit confused on this issue... and in short-lived period where he is enjoying messianic fervor, he should be your biggest gripe... as his influence is far bigger an impact than the fragments of religion.

What would Allah want...

 

[faceking]

but even Barrah Obama is a bit confused on this issue... and in short-lived period where he is enjoying messianic fervor, he should be your biggest gripe... as his influence is far bigger an impact than the fragments of religion.

It's one thing to have an enemy destroy your efforts, but when it's one of your "own" that undermines you. Eh, if this issue is that fucking important, then many folks should stop giving him his 100% "free and clear" pass.

 

[Guy-jin]

The Propositions system needs to go.

People in Cali focus on every possible thing that caused our economic problem except Prop 13, which is, without a doubt, ultimately the greatest drain on our state's economy and is now so far gone that it's practically an unsolvable problem.

Prop 8 is another example of the people being incapable of making a fair or even constitutional decision. There's a reason we don't put Constitutional Amendments up for a simple majority vote on the Federal level, and Prop 8 exemplifies it.

Still, I think the thing that pisses me off the most about it is the Mormon agenda and how it was the real driving force behind Prop 8. Sick.

 

[slurper_la]

The Propositions system needs to go.

People in Cali focus on every possible thing that caused our economic problem except Prop 13, which is, without a doubt, ultimately the greatest drain on our state's economy and is now so far gone that it's practically an unsolvable problem.

Prop 8 is another example of the people being incapable of making a fair or even constitutional decision. There's a reason we don't put Constitutional Amendments up for a simple majority vote on the Federal level, and Prop 8 exemplifies it.

Still, I think the thing that pisses me off the most about it is the Mormon agenda and how it was the real driving force behind Prop 8. Sick.

indeed!

Dear Voters, Please Stop Voting - LAist: Los Angeles News, Food, Arts & Events

 

[faceking]

The Propositions system needs to go.

People in Cali focus on every possible thing that caused our economic problem except Prop 13, which is, without a doubt, ultimately the greatest drain on our state's economy and is now so far gone that it's practically an unsolvable problem.

you forgot just about 95% of the other props that sounded good "more $$ for schools" "more money for police retirement" "fix the roads" "build more parks"... without ANY clue of the long term fiscal impact... sounds VERY familiar with the last 5 months of 2009.

and prop 13 aside, i wanna know what the California legislature did with all the real estate boom they reaped. besides add more big gov't... they didn't expect YoY revenues of the housing boom, did they?

 

[faceking]

Prop 8 is another example of the people being incapable of making a fair or even constitutional decision. There's a reason we don't put Constitutional Amendments up for a simple majority vote on the Federal level, and Prop 8 exemplifies it.

I still see a lot of this as a terminology issue. You can keep "marriage" between a man and a woman... don't force the state or the schools to really opine one way or another. Just allow all equal rights of "partnership" or civil union.

The state shouldn't be recognizing a "marriage" per se, anyways. (and please that has nothing to do with 'separation of church and state'... far too many ppl need educate themselves on what that exactly means). And the same-sex marriage agenda went about this in largely a wrong way and/or got pushed into the corner, causing it to be a cultural issue by going head-to-head with the church at times, vs. gaining equal protection and rights under the law. Granted I fully understand a swath of the religious extreme would fight tooth and nail against even the slightest of same-sex couple rights.

I have to believe many Prop 8 proponents probably don't mind the same-sex rights (medical, wills, property, etc...), what they DO mind is an assault on their culture and values. It's what it's unfortunately become.

I'm guessing a bunch of you will get all puffy and ornery by that. It's just my observation and the libertarian in me.

 

[Bbucko]

I notice how this sorta rhetoric drivels out EVERY time the same-sex marriage doesn't go the way of many of my friends.

Religion, religion, religion... with no knock on other compelling demographics on anti same-sex marriage constituencies... i.e. the VERY VERY swung African American community, Truman Democrats against same-sex marriage, and so folrth. Or... that totally misunderstood claim of "separation of church and state".

So convenient and fun to just blast the church... zzzzzzzz. I understand that some Christians/Catholics (most of my Roman Catholic cousins are all for same-sex marriage, FWIW) are the biggest proponents of Prop 8, but even Barrah Obama is a bit confused on this issue... and in short-lived period where he is enjoying messianic fervor, he should be your biggest gripe... as his influence is far bigger an impact than the fragments of religion.

What would Allah want...

The problem is not the individuals, it's the institutions they represent, most especially the evangelical Protestant denominations, the Mormon church and Roman Catholicism. As institutions, they bankroll their bigotry and make the denial of my rights one of their top priorities: but they will lose this fight.

The only arguments they have regarding the denial of same-sex marriage are either illogical (slippery-slope of bestiality, etc) or religious (which I personally find just as illogical). As our constitution forbids a national church, relying on religious arguments to perpetuate discrimination will be found unconstitutional, eventually. The "ick factor" is not grounds for establishing law, either. Future generations will simply not understand what all the fuss was about.

But you are right in that many people paint "The Church" with too broad a brush. The Episcopals (depending on the parish) and Unitarians manage to be very supportive to gays in general and to same-sex marriage in particular. But the loud voices of the Catholic and Mormon churches drown them out.

 

[Notaguru2]

It seems the famed Olsen is going to take the case to the highest court in the land. It seems y'all were right afterall; a lot of legal minds seem to think the way to get this done is through equal protection.

I'll be watching...

 

[SEXXXX]

never did care much about the MARRIAGE part, as long as whatever UNION same sex has EQUAL PROTECTION AND BENEFIT under the law

 

[faceking]

The problem is not the individuals, it's the institutions they represent, most especially the evangelical Protestant denominations, the Mormon church and Roman Catholicism. As institutions, they bankroll their bigotry and make the denial of my rights one of their top priorities: but they will lose this fight.

Good point. Amazing how deep those pockets are. Always struck me odd, that the Roman Catholic church has billions in their coffers. And they are all for humanity and helping suffrage and all that jazz..... for a very small portion, they could wipe out hunger on the entire continent of Africa... (and thusly gain millions and millions of dedicated thankful followers). Yet it's the small time "Mother Theresas" that do the dirty work on their own. Digressing off topic.

Anyways, it's again this question of rights vs. terminology. Sorry, I see a lot it that way. I will safely say the majority of gays aren't too fond of the church, yet are fighting for one of the penultimate religious hallmarks in marriage. Marriage is not a governmental institution, but an institution deeply rooted in religion that a state and culture was built upon and recognized as a driver for pro-creation and family foundation.

 

[faceking]

never did care much about the MARRIAGE part, as long as whatever UNION same sex has EQUAL PROTECTION AND BENEFIT under the law

Agree, but if you could keep it down a little... we've got a few folks here trying to catch up on sleep on the forum couch.

 

[faceking]

It seems the famed Olsen is going to take the case to the highest court in the land. It seems y'all were right afterall; a lot of legal minds seem to think the way to get this done is through equal protection.

I'll be watching...

Yeah, one by one it if you have to... versus the buttress ramming through the front doors of the religious institution.

Speaking of religious blather... I noticed your signature sez "meat is murder" (via the Smiths).... so if you abort a baby, and be useful and efficient (a la Eskimos and Native American Indians) and stew up the aborted fetus meat in a nice gravy... is abortion only then considered murder? :biggrin1:

 

[sexplease]

I vow to transcend failed philosophies, masquerading as religions and cultural norms, and their inept, out-of-date dogma.

Dogma which has conditioned societies and civilizations into a semi-fascist collective, "giving and granting" definitions and limits to ANYONE'S LIFE RIGHTS.
Rights are most certainly "granted" because of some cultural belief or, religion "gave" them to you... and the semi-civilized State accepts these, mostly out-of date doctrines.

All humans ARE equal FIRST.

If someone chooses a yoke, it's their choice and they alone stand with those consequences and benefits.

NOT the other way around.

Equality is NOT the end, but the starting point to walk side-by-side, taking turns leading all humankind into a better future.

Michael*

 

[B_Enough_for_Me]

Homosexuality IS an inherent trait.

It doesn't matter what you think, you need to convince the Supreme Court that homosexuality is inherent. Of course, the folks who switch over a few times will make it impossible.

 

[B_Enough_for_Me]

Yes indeed you must have. Have you applied for a refund of your tuition yet because the balance of that alleged law education has failed you?

Where, exactly?