Grand Theater in California (Shocked?) "Sodomite Suppression Act"

[Silhouette]

Matt McLaughlin has a goal but that goal has nothing to do with gays or the Bible. This time he has an attorney general that agrees with him and will work with him. McLaughlin has been bringing these nonsense initiatives for years. What he wants to do is end the initiative process completely. He makes his initiatives as odious as possible. How bad do they have to get before the state closes down the whole process.

Kamala Harris agrees. She has proposed raising the filing fee from $200 to $8000.

Well she's already half way to a totalitarian California. After all, with a sweep of her hand, she ordered county clerks there to violate intiative law and start issuing bogus gay marriage licenses. There is no California official who may refuse to uphold CA initiative law. It is the law in the interim no matter how many courts rule if it is clear it is on its way to the US Supreme Court for a final weigh. Which of course Prop 8 was. The High Court never ruled on the merits of Prop 8, they just refused to visit it altogether, but did Uphold Windsor which said gay marriage is/was state's choice until further notice.

Last time I checked, California is a state.

Here's how Kamala Harris is guilty of sedition:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_3

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SEC. 3.5. An administrative agency, including an administrative
agency created by the Constitution or an initiative statute, has no
power:
(a) To declare a statute unenforceable, or refuse to enforce a
statute, on the basis of it being unconstitutional unless an
appellate court has made a determination that such statute is
unconstitutional;
(b) To declare a statute unconstitutional;
(c) To declare a statute unenforceable, or to refuse to enforce a
statute on the basis that federal law or federal regulations prohibit
the enforcement of such statute unless an appellate court has made a
determination that the enforcement of such statute is prohibited by
federal law or federal regulations.

The latest Finding of Constitutionality on the question of gay marriage was Windsor 2013. That Finding was that a state's discreet community is the determiner of whether or not gay marriage is legal until/unless further notice. Immediately after this Finding by the Highest Court in our country, Kamala Harris did wilfully perform sedition upon her state by using her office to order under threat, lowerling county clerks to disobey their oaths of Office to issue "marriage licenses" in direct conflict with statute law present to this day in the California Constitution which reads:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SEC. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or
recognized in California.

Here's how she can be removed from office immediately:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_7

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 7 PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
SEC. 9. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution,
no person or organization which advocates the overthrow of the
Government of the United States or the State by force or violence or
other unlawful means or who advocates the support of a foreign
government against the United States in the event of hostilities
shall:
a) Hold any office or employment under this State, including but
not limited to the University of California, or with any county, city
or county, city, district, political subdivision, authority, board,
bureau, commission or other public agency of this State

 

[Silhouette]

I already published my remarks on another thread. I don't want to have anything to do with somebody who wants to kill their fellow Americans because they don't like them. Whatever his point may be, it was lost in making a serious proposal to enact a law to put people to death for lifestyles he disagrees with.

A "serious proposal"? Really?

Sheesh "St Mike"...

This thread BTW isn't about whether it is right or wrong to encourage the general public to shoot people as they see fit. Obviously. It is a thread about the ruse of pretending this proposed statute is a "serious proposal".

Obviously it is not. Which is very disturbing indeed.

Even more disturbing is California's AG Kamala Harris "playing along" throwing her hands up in the air in professed impotence when all she and the legislature would have to do is say the proposed intiative is about two things 1. Amending the death penalty (which it does not state in its title, therefore it cannot be submitted for a vote) and banning distribution of homosexual propaganda in schools.

It's a stroke of genius by the theater troupe in CA. At once they pluck the heartstrings and tie the issue to a reasonable cause "to keep pro-homosexual propaganda away from kids in school" (...like Kevin Jennings' fisting and anal sex promotion a few years back) and at the same time to an utterly violent and vile cause "to kill homosexuals at will". So this ruse was crafted to tie reasonable people with reasonable objections to inappropriate promotion of homosexuality to impressionable youth (see youth and current HIV/AIDS statistics) to violent people who would kill gays by shooting them to death....

That's why in the OP I posted the quote from the West Coast news station that said "even SOME" anti gay marriage people were speaking out about this law.

Really? A tiny fraction of all the people opposed to gay marriage are the only ones who aren't simultaneously contemplating shooting gays to death?

This type of hyperbole was exactly the type of hyperbole used in Ferguson MO to ramp up racial (and therefore civil ) unrest.

If you aren't convinced of the deeply disturbed and insidious nature of this cult and their bought/threatened sychophants in high places by now, you never will be.

 

[Silhouette]

Part and parcel of that deviancy is what you see in this ridiculous farce, unbridled deceit advanced through fraudulent means designed to influence the ignorant....They ruined the lives of innocent people who simply disagreed with their choices and who asked to not be forced to participate in the celebration of that which they could not rightfully partake in. That is an illicit use of government, it is a vulgar use of the justice system and this latest farce is something well beyond vulgar... it is a lie, advanced as truth, designed to lead innocent people to believe that which is false as truth...

This is an attack on democracy; and nothing short of it. The lengths that they are going to with this particular farce is the most disturbing of all IMHO.

 

[Syriusly]

Matt McLaughlin has a goal but that goal has nothing to do with gays or the Bible. This time he has an attorney general that agrees with him and will work with him. McLaughlin has been bringing these nonsense initiatives for years. What he wants to do is end the initiative process completely. He makes his initiatives as odious as possible. How bad do they have to get before the state closes down the whole process.

Kamala Harris agrees. She has proposed raising the filing fee from $200 to $8000.

Well she's already half way to a totalitarian California. After all, with a sweep of her hand, she ordered county clerks there to violate intiative law and start issuing bogus gay marriage licenses. e]

You are a loon.

The gay marriage ban was overturned by Federal Court, appealed all the way to the Supreme Court and never overturned.

Kamala Harris would be guilty of contempt of court if she had not ordered county clerks to start issuing legal marriage licenses.

 

[Syriusly]

Part and parcel of that deviancy is what you see in this ridiculous farce, unbridled deceit advanced through fraudulent means designed to influence the ignorant....They ruined the lives of innocent people who simply disagreed with their choices and who asked to not be forced to participate in the celebration of that which they could not rightfully partake in. That is an illicit use of government, it is a vulgar use of the justice system and this latest farce is something well beyond vulgar... it is a lie, advanced as truth, designed to lead innocent people to believe that which is false as truth...

This is an attack on democracy; and nothing short of it. The lengths that they are going to with this particular farce is the most disturbing of all IMHO.

LOL.....which part- one of your fellow travellers trying to pass an initiative allowing homosexuals to be shot?

Or the courts overturning unconstitutional law?

 

[Silhouette]

LOL.....which part- one of your fellow travellers trying to pass an initiative allowing homosexuals to be shot?

Or the courts overturning unconstitutional law?

He's an imposter. A convenient stooge. A role-player. Not unlike some of the posters here.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Part and parcel of that deviancy is what you see in this ridiculous farce, unbridled deceit advanced through fraudulent means designed to influence the ignorant....They ruined the lives of innocent people who simply disagreed with their choices and who asked to not be forced to participate in the celebration of that which they could not rightfully partake in. That is an illicit use of government, it is a vulgar use of the justice system and this latest farce is something well beyond vulgar... it is a lie, advanced as truth, designed to lead innocent people to believe that which is false as truth...

This is an attack on democracy; and nothing short of it. The lengths that they are going to with this particular farce is the most disturbing of all IMHO.

It's an attack on freedom... that's for dam' sure. Pure... unadulterated evil.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I still find it FASCINATING that the cult can't face this thread.

Clear evidence that Evil can't stand in the light of truth.

 

[Silhouette]

Yes, rather telling isn't it? It's like they all are in the know. Which in itself smacks of a conspiracy. What else could explain the total vacuum of them posting here when they normally show up like a choreographed chorus line of spam in all the other LGBT threads?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Oh gee, look who's talking about gay people again....

I don't know. You?

Sil swore that she was done obsessing over gay people, and that she would never again start or participate in a thread about gay people. I believe that was on Friday. And here she is again, like an addict who just can't walk away.

Syriously and that panda bear obsess over the gay issue. They keep threads going into the hundreds of pages.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I already published my remarks on another thread. I don't want to have anything to do with somebody who wants to kill their fellow Americans because they don't like them. Whatever his point may be, it was lost in making a serious proposal to enact a law to put people to death for lifestyles he disagrees with.

A "serious proposal"? Really?

Sheesh "St Mike"...

This thread BTW isn't about whether it is right or wrong to encourage the general public to shoot people as they see fit. Obviously. It is a thread about the ruse of pretending this proposed statute is a "serious proposal".

Obviously it is not. Which is very disturbing indeed.

Even more disturbing is California's AG Kamala Harris "playing along" throwing her hands up in the air in professed impotence when all she and the legislature would have to do is say the proposed intiative is about two things 1. Amending the death penalty (which it does not state in its title, therefore it cannot be submitted for a vote) and banning distribution of homosexual propaganda in schools.

It's a stroke of genius by the theater troupe in CA. At once they pluck the heartstrings and tie the issue to a reasonable cause "to keep pro-homosexual propaganda away from kids in school" (...like Kevin Jennings' fisting and anal sex promotion a few years back) and at the same time to an utterly violent and vile cause "to kill homosexuals at will". So this ruse was crafted to tie reasonable people with reasonable objections to inappropriate promotion of homosexuality to impressionable youth (see youth and current HIV/AIDS statistics) to violent people who would kill gays by shooting them to death....

That's why in the OP I posted the quote from the West Coast news station that said "even SOME" anti gay marriage people were speaking out about this law.

Really? A tiny fraction of all the people opposed to gay marriage are the only ones who aren't simultaneously contemplating shooting gays to death?

This type of hyperbole was exactly the type of hyperbole used in Ferguson MO to ramp up racial (and therefore civil ) unrest.

If you aren't convinced of the deeply disturbed and insidious nature of this cult and their bought/threatened sychophants in high places by now, you never will be.

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Part and parcel of that deviancy is what you see in this ridiculous farce, unbridled deceit advanced through fraudulent means designed to influence the ignorant....They ruined the lives of innocent people who simply disagreed with their choices and who asked to not be forced to participate in the celebration of that which they could not rightfully partake in. That is an illicit use of government, it is a vulgar use of the justice system and this latest farce is something well beyond vulgar... it is a lie, advanced as truth, designed to lead innocent people to believe that which is false as truth...

This is an attack on democracy; and nothing short of it. The lengths that they are going to with this particular farce is the most disturbing of all IMHO.

LOL.....which part- one of your fellow travellers trying to pass an initiative allowing homosexuals to be shot?

Or the courts overturning unconstitutional law?

You're an ass if you think he's one of our people. He's one of yours which is the point of this thread, that you homos can't face the fact that the most evil creeps are in your camp.

 

[Silhouette]

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

Nobody is saying it's a joke. But the mistake you are making is that Matt Mclaughlin is "an evil POS". He is evil, but not because he advocates shooting gays. Because he doesn't. I guarantee you he himself is gay. I would bet my house on it and win. It's what he and Kamala Harris are up to, along with, apparently, the bloc of LGBT regulars here at USMB.

Syriusly you can't shut up. But only after constant prodding did she show up and make a couple cameos on the last page. You I suspect all along have been a role player. I've said as much before. And here you are "the anti gay marriage poster" alluding to as how this "really is a serious proposal" of a guy you are labelling evil for all the wrong reasons.

It's just a curious thing. The title of the thread is evolving quite quickly into not just the AG of California and the convenient gay lawyer from LA up to a ruse. It is now "...and why are all the LGBT posters at USMB suddenly phobic of this title". Shouldn't they be here defending gays from being shot and shouting from the rooftops about how evil this guy is (and all Christians by extension who object to gay marriage therefore)!

...yet...

...nothing...

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

Nobody is saying it's a joke. But the mistake you are making is that Matt Mclaughlin is "an evil POS". He is evil, but not because he advocates shooting gays. Because he doesn't. I guarantee you he himself is gay. I would bet my house on it and win. It's what he and Kamala Harris are up to, along with, apparently, the bloc of LGBT regulars here at USMB.

Syriusly you can't shut up. But only after constant prodding did she show up and make a couple cameos on the last page. You I suspect all along have been a role player. I've said as much before. And here you are "the anti gay marriage poster" alluding to as how this "really is a serious proposal" of a guy you are labelling evil for all the wrong reasons.

It's just a curious thing. The title of the thread is evolving quite quickly into not just the AG of California and the convenient gay lawyer from LA up to a ruse. It is now "...and why are all the LGBT posters at USMB suddenly phobic of this title". Shouldn't they be here defending gays from being shot and shouting from the rooftops about how evil this guy is (and all Christians by extension who object to gay marriage therefore)!

...yet...

...nothing...

Still going along with the idiotic notion I'm playing a role? You sent me a PM begging me to participate on this thread and this is how you repay me? How about you produce some fucking evidence I'm playing a role? Saintmichaeldefendthem has been around for the last 8 years on various forums and I've been consistent on all my positions. Don't ask me to post on your threads and then ambush me. Stop being a fucking troll, would you?

 

[Syriusly]

Part and parcel of that deviancy is what you see in this ridiculous farce, unbridled deceit advanced through fraudulent means designed to influence the ignorant....They ruined the lives of innocent people who simply disagreed with their choices and who asked to not be forced to participate in the celebration of that which they could not rightfully partake in. That is an illicit use of government, it is a vulgar use of the justice system and this latest farce is something well beyond vulgar... it is a lie, advanced as truth, designed to lead innocent people to believe that which is false as truth...

This is an attack on democracy; and nothing short of it. The lengths that they are going to with this particular farce is the most disturbing of all IMHO.

LOL.....which part- one of your fellow travellers trying to pass an initiative allowing homosexuals to be shot?

Or the courts overturning unconstitutional law?

You're an ass if you think he's one of our people. He's one of yours which is the point of this thread, that you homos can't face the fact that the most evil creeps are in your camp.

You are just an ass for being such a homophobic bigot.

This guy sounds just like your buddy in bigotry- Keys. He is one of yours.....embrace the evil that your side promulgates....

 

[Syriusly]

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

Nobody is saying it's a joke. But the mistake you are making is that Matt Mclaughlin is "an evil POS". He is evil, but not because he advocates shooting gays. Because he doesn't. I guarantee you he himself is gay. I would bet my house on it and win. It's what he and Kamala Harris are up to, along with, apparently, the bloc of LGBT regulars here at USMB....

You are delusional.

 

[Syriusly]

I already published my remarks on another thread. I don't want to have anything to do with somebody who wants to kill their fellow Americans because they don't like them. Whatever his point may be, it was lost in making a serious proposal to enact a law to put people to death for lifestyles he disagrees with.

A "serious proposal"? Really?

Sheesh "St Mike"...

This thread BTW isn't about whether it is right or wrong to encourage the general public to shoot people as they see fit. Obviously. It is a thread about the ruse of pretending this proposed statute is a "serious proposal".

Obviously it is not. Which is very disturbing indeed.

Even more disturbing is California's AG Kamala Harris "playing along" throwing her hands up in the air in professed impotence when all she and the legislature would have to do is say the proposed intiative is about two things 1. Amending the death penalty (which it does not state in its title, therefore it cannot be submitted for a vote) and banning distribution of homosexual propaganda in schools.

It's a stroke of genius by the theater troupe in CA. At once they pluck the heartstrings and tie the issue to a reasonable cause "to keep pro-homosexual propaganda away from kids in school" (...like Kevin Jennings' fisting and anal sex promotion a few years back) and at the same time to an utterly violent and vile cause "to kill homosexuals at will". So this ruse was crafted to tie reasonable people with reasonable objections to inappropriate promotion of homosexuality to impressionable youth (see youth and current HIV/AIDS statistics) to violent people who would kill gays by shooting them to death....

That's why in the OP I posted the quote from the West Coast news station that said "even SOME" anti gay marriage people were speaking out about this law.

Really? A tiny fraction of all the people opposed to gay marriage are the only ones who aren't simultaneously contemplating shooting gays to death?

This type of hyperbole was exactly the type of hyperbole used in Ferguson MO to ramp up racial (and therefore civil ) unrest.

If you aren't convinced of the deeply disturbed and insidious nature of this cult and their bought/threatened sychophants in high places by now, you never will be.

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

Unfortunately due to the initiative process here in California, it is unlikely that this initiative proposal can be prevented from going forward- though it should die a quick death when attempting to gather signatures- but maybe not- there are lots of areas of California where unfortunately the hysterical anti-gay propaganda that this guy apparently has swallowed whole is quite popular. Wouldn't surprise me if he is able to get 20,000 or more signatures.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I already published my remarks on another thread. I don't want to have anything to do with somebody who wants to kill their fellow Americans because they don't like them. Whatever his point may be, it was lost in making a serious proposal to enact a law to put people to death for lifestyles he disagrees with.

A "serious proposal"? Really?

Sheesh "St Mike"...

This thread BTW isn't about whether it is right or wrong to encourage the general public to shoot people as they see fit. Obviously. It is a thread about the ruse of pretending this proposed statute is a "serious proposal".

Obviously it is not. Which is very disturbing indeed.

Even more disturbing is California's AG Kamala Harris "playing along" throwing her hands up in the air in professed impotence when all she and the legislature would have to do is say the proposed intiative is about two things 1. Amending the death penalty (which it does not state in its title, therefore it cannot be submitted for a vote) and banning distribution of homosexual propaganda in schools.

It's a stroke of genius by the theater troupe in CA. At once they pluck the heartstrings and tie the issue to a reasonable cause "to keep pro-homosexual propaganda away from kids in school" (...like Kevin Jennings' fisting and anal sex promotion a few years back) and at the same time to an utterly violent and vile cause "to kill homosexuals at will". So this ruse was crafted to tie reasonable people with reasonable objections to inappropriate promotion of homosexuality to impressionable youth (see youth and current HIV/AIDS statistics) to violent people who would kill gays by shooting them to death....

That's why in the OP I posted the quote from the West Coast news station that said "even SOME" anti gay marriage people were speaking out about this law.

Really? A tiny fraction of all the people opposed to gay marriage are the only ones who aren't simultaneously contemplating shooting gays to death?

This type of hyperbole was exactly the type of hyperbole used in Ferguson MO to ramp up racial (and therefore civil ) unrest.

If you aren't convinced of the deeply disturbed and insidious nature of this cult and their bought/threatened sychophants in high places by now, you never will be.

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

Unfortunately due to the initiative process here in California, it is unlikely that this initiative proposal can be prevented from going forward- though it should die a quick death when attempting to gather signatures- but maybe not- there are lots of areas of California where unfortunately the hysterical anti-gay propaganda that this guy apparently has swallowed whole is quite popular. Wouldn't surprise me if he is able to get 20,000 or more signatures.

I have a couple of thoughts and I'm not trying to be adversarial, but I think you're mistaken in thinking that this lawyer was one of us. Albeit very misguided, he's doing this for your side.

The second thing is that, while initiatives were intended as a way for the California people to pass laws on their own independent of the legislature, it's still very much run by special interests. Freelance petition circulators are very well paid on a per signature basis. They are paid anywhere between 50 cents and $2, perhaps even more, per signature. Special interests funding these efforts know that petitioners will push the higher paying petitions more than the lower paying petitions. Simple math would indicate that it takes several millions of dollars to fund an effort to get an initiative on the ballot. That's big money and big donors, donors who have to disclose their contributions and can be targeted.

And so it would be an uphill battle from the start as there really is no special interest to shoot gay people, however many bigots you think reside in California. And even if the requisite number of signatures are obtained, a popular vote to enact a law to kill gay people wouldn't even remotely pass.

But none of this is really what's bugging me. I am very much angered by anyone proposing that we start killing people we don't like, no matter who they are. I hope you believe me when I say that while I disagree with your choice of lifestyle, I hope that you live a long and happy and are never subject to legal sanction for how you live your private life. To me this is no joke because when people start legal proceedings to enact a law to kill a class of citizens, we've gone WAY above just talk, we've taken the first step in making it a reality. The fact that this guy was trying to garner sympathy for gays will be lost against the backdrop of the precedent he's setting.

And nobody else on this thread who's responded seems to recognize the danger I'm seeing.

 

[Syriusly]

I already published my remarks on another thread. I don't want to have anything to do with somebody who wants to kill their fellow Americans because they don't like them. Whatever his point may be, it was lost in making a serious proposal to enact a law to put people to death for lifestyles he disagrees with.

A "serious proposal"? Really?

Sheesh "St Mike"...

This thread BTW isn't about whether it is right or wrong to encourage the general public to shoot people as they see fit. Obviously. It is a thread about the ruse of pretending this proposed statute is a "serious proposal".

Obviously it is not. Which is very disturbing indeed.

Even more disturbing is California's AG Kamala Harris "playing along" throwing her hands up in the air in professed impotence when all she and the legislature would have to do is say the proposed intiative is about two things 1. Amending the death penalty (which it does not state in its title, therefore it cannot be submitted for a vote) and banning distribution of homosexual propaganda in schools.

It's a stroke of genius by the theater troupe in CA. At once they pluck the heartstrings and tie the issue to a reasonable cause "to keep pro-homosexual propaganda away from kids in school" (...like Kevin Jennings' fisting and anal sex promotion a few years back) and at the same time to an utterly violent and vile cause "to kill homosexuals at will". So this ruse was crafted to tie reasonable people with reasonable objections to inappropriate promotion of homosexuality to impressionable youth (see youth and current HIV/AIDS statistics) to violent people who would kill gays by shooting them to death....

That's why in the OP I posted the quote from the West Coast news station that said "even SOME" anti gay marriage people were speaking out about this law.

Really? A tiny fraction of all the people opposed to gay marriage are the only ones who aren't simultaneously contemplating shooting gays to death?

This type of hyperbole was exactly the type of hyperbole used in Ferguson MO to ramp up racial (and therefore civil ) unrest.

If you aren't convinced of the deeply disturbed and insidious nature of this cult and their bought/threatened sychophants in high places by now, you never will be.

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

Unfortunately due to the initiative process here in California, it is unlikely that this initiative proposal can be prevented from going forward- though it should die a quick death when attempting to gather signatures- but maybe not- there are lots of areas of California where unfortunately the hysterical anti-gay propaganda that this guy apparently has swallowed whole is quite popular. Wouldn't surprise me if he is able to get 20,000 or more signatures.

I have a couple of thoughts and I'm not trying to be adversarial, but I think you're mistaken in thinking that this lawyer was one of us. Albeit very misguided, he's doing this for your side..

Well I disagree- the difference between the position of Silhouette and Keys is not that very different from this guy- Keys insists to this day that consensual sodomy should be illegal. Your position I will grant you is more nuanced, but it is a matter of degrees.

This guy is as much a kook as Silhouette and Keys- he is just getting more publicity.

 

[Syriusly]

I already published my remarks on another thread. I don't want to have anything to do with somebody who wants to kill their fellow Americans because they don't like them. Whatever his point may be, it was lost in making a serious proposal to enact a law to put people to death for lifestyles he disagrees with.

A "serious proposal"? Really?

Sheesh "St Mike"...

This thread BTW isn't about whether it is right or wrong to encourage the general public to shoot people as they see fit. Obviously. It is a thread about the ruse of pretending this proposed statute is a "serious proposal".

Obviously it is not. Which is very disturbing indeed.

Even more disturbing is California's AG Kamala Harris "playing along" throwing her hands up in the air in professed impotence when all she and the legislature would have to do is say the proposed intiative is about two things 1. Amending the death penalty (which it does not state in its title, therefore it cannot be submitted for a vote) and banning distribution of homosexual propaganda in schools.

It's a stroke of genius by the theater troupe in CA. At once they pluck the heartstrings and tie the issue to a reasonable cause "to keep pro-homosexual propaganda away from kids in school" (...like Kevin Jennings' fisting and anal sex promotion a few years back) and at the same time to an utterly violent and vile cause "to kill homosexuals at will". So this ruse was crafted to tie reasonable people with reasonable objections to inappropriate promotion of homosexuality to impressionable youth (see youth and current HIV/AIDS statistics) to violent people who would kill gays by shooting them to death....

That's why in the OP I posted the quote from the West Coast news station that said "even SOME" anti gay marriage people were speaking out about this law.

Really? A tiny fraction of all the people opposed to gay marriage are the only ones who aren't simultaneously contemplating shooting gays to death?

This type of hyperbole was exactly the type of hyperbole used in Ferguson MO to ramp up racial (and therefore civil ) unrest.

If you aren't convinced of the deeply disturbed and insidious nature of this cult and their bought/threatened sychophants in high places by now, you never will be.

It became a serious proposal when it was submitted as an initiative to be passed into law. Someone might think that's a joke, but I don't. When somebody makes a legal move to attempt to make lawful the shooting of other Americans by the government, or failing at that, by private citizens, that person is an evil POS and should, like Haman, be subject to the genocide he proposed for others. It isn't the least bit funny and it's serious to me.

Unfortunately due to the initiative process here in California, it is unlikely that this initiative proposal can be prevented from going forward- though it should die a quick death when attempting to gather signatures- but maybe not- there are lots of areas of California where unfortunately the hysterical anti-gay propaganda that this guy apparently has swallowed whole is quite popular. Wouldn't surprise me if he is able to get 20,000 or more signatures.

The second thing is that, while initiatives were intended as a way for the California people to pass laws on their own independent of the legislature, it's still very much run by special interests. Freelance petition circulators are very well paid on a per signature basis. They are paid anywhere between 50 cents and $2, perhaps even more, per signature. Special interests funding these efforts know that petitioners will push the higher paying petitions more than the lower paying petitions. Simple math would indicate that it takes several millions of dollars to fund an effort to get an initiative on the ballot. That's big money and big donors, donors who have to disclose their contributions and can be targeted.
=.

Well I agree with both of your points- and its why I don't really see this guy's petition going far- he may pay out of his pocket to have the petition circulated in some of the hotbeds of anti-gay sentiment- but unlikely he has any real money.