Is it too easy to amend California's Constitution?

[Cecilie1200]

Putting aside the gay marriage initiative in California....

Opinion
It's too easy to amend California's Constitution
The Proposition 8 battle showed that the process to get an initiative amendment on the state ballot should be more rigorous.
By Edward L. Lascher Jr., Floyd F. Feeney and Tim Hodson
February 4, 2009

- what do you think?

Who cares? Their judges don't pay any damned attention to the laws anyway, so what difference does it make? Californians might just as well make confetti out of their Constitution for all the effect it has.

 

[SW2SILVERQUASI]

I have seen democratic votes overturned as "Unconstitutional". I wonder, why vote? Consult the Magic 8-ball, and ignore the majority. Seems to contradict the ideal behind democracy. Gays have the same rights as heterosexuals. Except....they can't marry. No, you can't marry ANYONE you love. That just isn't in the Constitution. You might love your deceased grandmother, but there aren't any rights guaranteeing you can marry her corpse. You might be a minority that is being discriminated against because you feel so inclined. But you still have the same rights as the rest of us, otherwise. I don't hate gays, but this is a non-issue. Gays already have parity with heterosexuals.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Putting aside the gay marriage initiative in California....

Opinion
It's too easy to amend California's Constitution
The Proposition 8 battle showed that the process to get an initiative amendment on the state ballot should be more rigorous.
By Edward L. Lascher Jr., Floyd F. Feeney and Tim Hodson
February 4, 2009

- what do you think?

Weren't you and all the left bots all crying that we needed MORE democracy not less?

I've N-E-V-E-R cried for more democracy. I loathe democracy without restraints. I am one who like sthe electoral college system we have. I am opposed to what most of the right progressives and left populists propose as reforms.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Putting aside the gay marriage initiative in California....

Opinion
It's too easy to amend California's Constitution
The Proposition 8 battle showed that the process to get an initiative amendment on the state ballot should be more rigorous.
By Edward L. Lascher Jr., Floyd F. Feeney and Tim Hodson
February 4, 2009

- what do you think?

Who cares? Their judges don't pay any damned attention to the laws anyway, so what difference does it make? Californians might just as well make confetti out of their Constitution for all the effect it has.

I never realized the depths of your ignorance until this here post. Did you major in ignorance in college or was it a minor?

 

[SW2SILVERQUASI]

Marriage. It's concept that needs a revision. Let's just get rid of it. Gays are the only ones that seem to want it anymore. Why bother? It's like all the other American ideals , if we really had any to begin with. We used to have them once upon a time. We used to follow common sense. We used to pretend to relate to one another, but that seems to be joke now. Gay marriage, sounds so fun. Perhaps, we should just bury heterosexually, or anything that smacks of orthodoxy, it seems to hinder that free thinkers' ideals of paradise. I forget what the hell we were discussing, but that doesn't seem to matter anymore, either. Nothing seems to mater anymore.

 

[Bullypulpit]

The issue of voter referendums makes it too easy to change state constitutions and laws wherever they are used. It short circuits the system established under a constitutional republic. Especially where the electorate votes for all these wonderful government services and then won't raise the taxes to pay for them, as just happened in California.

 

[Gunny]

"Equality under the law" is a red herring in this context.

The criteria of being issued a marriage license is based upon objectively identifiable gender, not by behavior.

What I find disgusting is the state meddling in the marriage business in any case.

Skin color is also objectively identifiable. That doesn't mean that discriminating based on it is legally permissible in a system with equality under the law.

Attempting to compare an obvious genetic trait -- skin color -- to behavior is intellectually dishonest. The equality under law already exists. What you are arguing for is INequality under the law, to cater to a minority's sexual desires which excludes anyone who does not possess that behavior.

 

[Gunny]

Things get a lot more complex when you involve more than two people, but I honestly have no objection to polyamorous relationships, or their codification in law, so long as we can ensure that no one is being treated as chattel.

We're already being treated as chattel by -in most states- being forced to get state permission to be married.

The person getting the privilege is always beholden to the one granting it.

See, I prefer to see it as a right rather than as a privilege. It's the people trying to make marriage discriminatory who see it as a privilege.

Behavior is not an identity....Compulsions are not identities.

I really don't get what you're trying to say here.

behavior, compulsions, and identity are irrelevant to my argument.

You can't leave out behavior, compulsions, and/or identity from the argument simply because they are inconvenient truths for you. They are relative to THIS argument; whether or not you wish to see them.

No one's trying to make marriage discriminatory. You're using backwards logic. The status quo is not trying to upset the status quo ... the aberrant minority is trying to upset the status quo and have its behavior catered to.

All laws are discriminatory. Period. Just depends on who or what they discriminate against.

 

[foggedinn]

Yes, it's too easy to change California's constitution.

Of course, I believe that the phrase "there ought to be a law" are the six most dangerous words in the English language.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yes, it's too easy to change California's constitution.

Of course, I believe that the phrase "there ought to be a law" are the six most dangerous words in the English language.

"Somebody should do something" is also a scary phrase.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Putting aside the gay marriage initiative in California....

Opinion
It's too easy to amend California's Constitution
The Proposition 8 battle showed that the process to get an initiative amendment on the state ballot should be more rigorous.
By Edward L. Lascher Jr., Floyd F. Feeney and Tim Hodson
February 4, 2009

- what do you think?

Yes... and that remains true when leftists do it; which is why California is such a disaster.

A Constitution is a RULE BOOK...

Imagine a poker game where the players changed the rules to suit their desires... it wouldn't be poker for very long, would it?

And the same thing goes for States and nations who seek to change the rules to accommodate every fickle whim... sooner than later the state dies the death of a thousand cuts and there are NO EXCEPTIONS.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Putting aside the gay marriage initiative in California....

- what do you think?

Weren't you and all the left bots all crying that we needed MORE democracy not less?

I've N-E-V-E-R cried for more democracy. I loathe democracy without restraints. I am one who like sthe electoral college system we have. I am opposed to what most of the right progressives and left populists propose as reforms.

"Right Progressives"...

ROFLMNAO... Sweet Mother that is HYSTERICAL!

 

[SW2SILVERQUASI]

It's TOO easy for the majority to change the constitution? Perhaps, that is a good thing? Perhaps, freedom and all, and with democracy, the minority should rule? Come on, I smell sour grapes. Really. It’s a case of : "I lost, Democracy sucks" . Please. We ALL have the same rights. Really. You still can't marry your horse ,though. That must really disappoint the minority, it must be like being put into an oven in Auschwitz, not being pampered and pandered to, ya drama queens. Such a tragedy. Get over it already.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Putting aside the gay marriage initiative in California....

Opinion
It's too easy to amend California's Constitution
The Proposition 8 battle showed that the process to get an initiative amendment on the state ballot should be more rigorous.
By Edward L. Lascher Jr., Floyd F. Feeney and Tim Hodson
February 4, 2009

- what do you think?

Yes... and that remains true when leftists do it; which is why California is such a disaster.

A Constitution is a RULE BOOK...

Imagine a poker game where the players changed the rules to suit their desires... it wouldn't be poker for very long, would it?

And the same thing goes for States and nations who seek to change the rules to accommodate every fickle whim... sooner than later the state dies the death of a thousand cuts and there are NO EXCEPTIONS.

 

[SW2SILVERQUASI]

California uber ales? ? California is going bankrupt. Ya need a hand out? Give sanctuary to all those poor, these ILLEAGALS yearning to be free. Be that shinning beacon of free thought, and have that highest rate of foreclosures and bankruptcies. My brother was tossed out of the golden gate state. Didn’t earn enough, seems freedom has more to do with income than ideals or sexuality or democracy.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

California uber ales? ? California is going bankrupt. Ya need a hand out? Give sanctuary to all those poor, these ILLEAGALS yearning to be free. Be that shinning beacon of free thought, and have that highest rate of foreclosures and bankruptcies. My brother was tossed out of the golden gate state. Didn’t earn enough, seems freedom has more to do with income than ideals or sexuality or democracy.

oh, is the poor baby feeling inferior?