Prop 8 Showdown

[Quantum Windbag]

and they would not have that right because some activists come into his state to try and persuade the citizens?.....is his state supposed to be immune to this type of shit?...welcome to the real world....

No, they would lose that right because a federal court decision would take that right away form the states and impose it upon them by decree.

thats not what he was saying though....he was talking about activist from California coming into his state to try to convince the voters of his state to agree with them.....i mean first off....California does not have activists.....

 

[Ravi]

gays should be second class citizens...they do not deserve the fundamental right to marry...that should be reserved for britney spears, liz taylor, larry king or who ever wants to get married and divorced a hundred times!!!!!

 

[ConHog]

Don't give up so easily. I actually support SSM, I just don't think the court has the right to overturn a valid election just because I don't like the results. My biggest problem with your argument is that I want to accept it so much that I am having a hard time finding the legal faults in it. On the other hand, if we start letting courts throw out the results of valid elections, where will it stop? That thought scares me more than screwing homosexuals out of the right to marry.

I EXACTLY agree with you. I don't care if they get married, but it is a state's rights issue, and RAVI is wrong the people DO have the right to vote directly towards this. That isn't at question at all. NO part of the lawsuit will be based on do the people have the right to vote directly on a CON amendment. They absolutely do. She is confusing two issues.

People can vote on anything they want, but we have a judicial system to protect the rights of the minority. 95% of the population is not allowed to vote on what rights 5% of the population are allowed to have

Of course not, BUT 95% are allowed to vote on not allowing 5% of the people to do something if it violates no rights.

 

[Yurt]

Don't give up so easily. I actually support SSM, I just don't think the court has the right to overturn a valid election just because I don't like the results. My biggest problem with your argument is that I want to accept it so much that I am having a hard time finding the legal faults in it. On the other hand, if we start letting courts throw out the results of valid elections, where will it stop? That thought scares me more than screwing homosexuals out of the right to marry.

You cannot vote on someone else's rights, imo. Therefore the vote was not valid.

It would be no different than saying a city can vote to ban guns in their borders.

Like I said, I really want to agree with you. I just need to think about it before I come down full force and argue for over turning an election.

it wasn't an election....

would you support a california amendment, passed by the same proposition method as prop 8, that stated slavery is legal? hey....its the will of the people...

 

[goldcatt]

On the other hand, if we start letting courts throw out the results of valid elections, where will it stop? That thought scares me more than screwing homosexuals out of the right to marry.

and this happens time and time again.....the losers take the results to court....instead of taking the time between elections to try and convince people and write a better proposition.....we get lawsuits.....

Throwing out the results of the election would be declaring the law void, as though it had never been. Declaring the law unconstitutional is actually validating the election in a way, since it has to recognize the law as a valid law in order to overturn it.

Since we're talking about marriage here, think of it as the difference between an annulment and a divorce.

 

[Harry Dresden]

On the other hand, if we start letting courts throw out the results of valid elections, where will it stop? That thought scares me more than screwing homosexuals out of the right to marry.

and this happens time and time again.....the losers take the results to court....instead of taking the time between elections to try and convince people and write a better proposition.....we get lawsuits.....

Because...you...can't...vote...on...someone's...civil...rights.

im not talking about civil rights bills....i am talking stuff like Medical Kush....

 

[jillian]

I could careless what happens in Cailfornia this is a state issue. But what bugs the shit out of me is when the activist from Cailifornia will push this issue on my state.

the same arguments were made in favor of anti-miscegenation laws.

civil rights are a federal issue. the states have no right to give fewer rights than the constitution. marriage is a fundamental right that is being denied to a group of people who are members of a suspect class.

that sounds like a federal issue to me.