DavisPhotog
Flyingphotog
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-26
Oakland, CA
clubs:
| Calif upholds gay marriage ban
said by SFGate :
The state Supreme Court has upheld a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, but also decided that the estimated 18,000 gay couples who tied the knot before the law took effect will stay wed. All I have to say is that the bigots of our state have spoken and our state's highest court has decided to uphold this treachery upon minorities.
--
I am the Flying Photog, see my website accordingly named Flyingphotog.com. User known formerly as zakooldude. |
|
grendal
Mmm Donuts
Premium
join:2001-10-10
Fremont, CA
clubs: | Not particular to this ruling, but is the minority ruling the majority any better? |
|
sapo
I eat meat
Premium
join:2002-09-16
Sacramento, CA | reply to DavisPhotog
As long as minorities are protected we don't have a problem.
--
Just when you think it's over, it's just beginning. |
|
RR Conductor
RailRoadDude
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
 ·Comcast
1 edit | reply to DavisPhotog
I guess you better call me, my family, millions of Mormons (my faith), Cathliocs, Jews, most African Americans, Muslims and others bigots too then Davis. If you want to see bigotry, look at the hate that was/is being spewed from the anti 8 side towards the pro 8 side. I am saddened you choose to depict us as bigots, because we aren't, in fact, my family are some of the most loving, kind and caring people you will ever meet, we just happen to believe marriage should only be between a man and a woman. |
|
DavisPhotog
Flyingphotog
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-26
Oakland, CA
clubs: | Please elaborate. I'm glad to listen. |
|
RR Conductor
RailRoadDude
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
1 edit | You're wrong about us, enuff said  |
|
Just Rachel
occasional optimist
Premium
join:2003-07-10
Mccloud, CA | reply to DavisPhotog
The people voted. Why should it not be upheld??  |
|
PrntRhd
join:2004-11-03
Fairfield, CA
·Comcast
·Comcast Formerly ..
1 edit | reply to DavisPhotog
The ruling does not surprise me. Saying all voters who voted yes are bigots insults bigots.
The Court would not invalidate the marriages that took place in the interim between their first ruling and the Prop 8 vote.
The California Supreme Court was caught in a bad spot on this, their first ruling claimed the right to marry was a "fundamental right", and they had the chance to reinforce that stand if they really believed they were correct, but the Court was not going to ride roughshod over the will of the voters who expressed their will in two different votes, one before the first ruling and one after.
Edit: So much for the "brave new world" they expected to receive accolades for after the first decision...now they managed to look indecisive and angered both sides. End Edit.
The state government could have avoided all this by simply creating civil unions. Marriage would be handled by the Church but the civil union paperwork would be the required and registered document filed with the govt.
This case will be taken to the Federal Supreme Court, a ruling there will be the final word for some time IF they decide to review it. |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
| reply to DavisPhotog
The last time the court overturned the vote, the people changed the constitution.
I think maybe the court has learned not to overturn the vote. Maybe.
Now, we can discuss the details of what we vote on next. For now, I'm glad the court agrees we the people get to decide what our constitution says.
Yay, democracy.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us |
|
wilbilt
Pronto Resurrected
Premium
join:2004-01-11
Oroville, CA
| reply to DavisPhotog
I think the vote should stand.
Not particular to this issue or any other, but that's how our system works. When the results of a vote are overturned, it reduces faith in the system and puts us one step closer to anarchy.
--
We were taking a vote when the ground came up and hit us. |
|
guhuna
R.I.P Mike
Premium
join:2001-03-31
Brentwood, CA | Exactly,
We "the people" voted on it. If we wanted it any differently we would have voted differently. |
|
USAOwnz
RIP dadkins
Premium
join:2003-11-15
P.R.C.
clubs:
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | reply to RR Conductor
said by RR Conductor  :I guess you better call me, my family, millions of Mormons (my faith), Cathliocs, Jews, most African Americans, Muslims and others bigots too then Davis. If you want to see bigotry, look at the hate that was/is being spewed from the anti 8 side towards the pro 8 side. I am saddened you choose to depict us as bigots, because we aren't, in fact, my family are some of the most loving, kind and caring people you will ever meet, we just happen to believe marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Pretty much all of the Jews I know and at the reform temple did not support pro 8. Quite a few moderate catholics did not support it, too.
--
I've got nothing  |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
| reply to DavisPhotog
For me, the court upholding the right of the people to vote and have that vote count is the issue. Twice now.
You don't like the result of a vote, keep putting things to the vote until you get the result you want. You sure don't want to *both* win a vote and then win a court fight afterwards to overturn that vote.
The next vote will be to turn out the bums on the court that think they know the will of the people better then the people who bother to vote. Because near as I can tell, that's a right everyone has, shares, and should defend.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us |
|
bobrk
You kids get offa my lawn
Premium
join:2000-02-02
San Jose, CA
·SONIC.NET
| The law that allows for pay signature gathering to put piece of shit laws into the initiative process so that the hulking herds can be misled into a 51% victory needs to be changed.
--
bobrk |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
| cool - do that, because whenever the vote is wrong (like electing bush, twice) clearly we need to change election laws.
Democracy. Mostly it sucks.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us |
|
Boricua65
join:2002-01-26
Puerto Rico | reply to DavisPhotog
»Prop 8 decision to be rendered tuesday..post your prediction
--
Yo te digo, el mundo esta jodido |
|
deadmeat
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Sonoma, CA
| reply to Just Rachel
said by Just Rachel :The people voted. Why should it not be upheld?? It an argument about the tyranny of the majority when it comes to discrimination and the rights of others. You have a minority looking for equal rights for their relationships under the law and lets face it they're not the most loved minority in the world. For example when you want to say something is stupid you call it gay.
Now you have the rights of this unpopular minority decided by a 51% majority vote.
--
"Keep your fundie guard up. They'll be looking to slip a shiv between your ribs first chance they see." |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
| Democracy sucks, doesn't it.
Still, I guess its better then 7 people deciding for all of us. At least to me it is.
Regardless of WHAT they were deciding, they shouldn't count more then 51% of us.
Get it?
PS - we choose the leader of our country on less then 51% majority popular votes, quite often. Fun, isn't it?
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Un···e_margin
--
My place : »www.schettino.us |
|
deadmeat
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Sonoma, CA
| said by JohnInSJ :Still, I guess its better then 7 people deciding for all of us. At least to me it is. Regardless of WHAT they were deciding, they shouldn't count more then 51% of us. Get it? I guess I read too many comic books growing up but I think it depends on whether you believe equal protection is a fundamental right. If you counted on the popular vote for fundamental rights for minorities jim crow laws would still likely be in effect in the south and people would have no firearms. Personally I think governments should leave marriages to churches and only do civil unions.
If that doesn't work gays could always organize into a religion and use religious protection laws against their oppressors. 
--
"Keep your fundie guard up. They'll be looking to slip a shiv between your ribs first chance they see." |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
| Focus... focus.
The question isn't about WHAT we voted on. Its on the right of the people to set their constitution, or 7 judges.
Do you really want to give up that right?
--
My place : »www.schettino.us |
|
