The Governator speaks out on prop 8!!

[Navy1960]

SACRAMENTO - As protesters took to the streets for a fifth day, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger yesterday expressed hope that the California Supreme Court would overturn Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriage.

"It's unfortunate, obviously, but it's not the end," he said about the same-sex marriage ban. "I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again lead in that area."


Schwarzenegger: Proposition 8 fight isn't over - The Boston Globe

While the right to marry the person you love is one that each state should decide for themselves and states like California have made that decision in the ballot box, it appears that when the voters do not meet with the Governators approval they do not matter. I wonder if he would have said the same thing had he lost his last election? The gay community has every right to seek redress through the courts if thats the avenue they wish to persue, but what is lost here is the fact that this was on the ballot , and was voted on by the people of the state of Ca. and as we had a similar measure pass here in Az. it was the expressed will of the people. For a Gov. that quite frankly cannot manage his own states affairs , and is presiding over a massive budget crisis and is seeking a Federal Bailout, it would seem that he would at least respect the willl of the voters and allow the gay community to seek their own options if they were not happy with the results.

 

[-Cp]

This is a text-book example of what happens when the god-hating, death-loving, foaming-at-the-mouth liberals don't get their way..

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The only way the Court can do anything is to declare the people have no legal right to change their Constitution.

 

[Navy1960]

The only way the Court can do anything is to declare the people have no legal right to change their Constitution.

Lawyers for same-sex couples argued that the anti-gay-marriage measure was an illegal constitutional revision -- not a more limited amendment, as backers maintained -- because it fundamentally altered the guarantee of equal protection. A constitutional revision, unlike an amendment, must be approved by the Legislature before going to voters.

The state high court has twice before struck down ballot measures as illegal constitutional revisions, but those initiatives involved "a broader scope of changes," said former California Supreme Court Justice Joseph Grodin, who publicly opposed Proposition 8 and was part of an earlier legal challenge to it. The court has suggested that a revision may be distinguished from an amendment by the breadth and the nature of the change, Grodin said

Still, Grodin said, he believes that the challenge has legal merit, though he declined to make any predictions. Santa Clara University law professor Gerald Uelmen called the case "a stretch."

Gay rights backers file 3 lawsuits challenging Prop. 8 - Los Angeles Times

It would appear that the argument is a technical one at least to strike it down. If thats so , then the argument is a weak one at best and has little chance of survival if it gets the Supreme Court unless a constitutional agrument can be made IMO.

 

[Jon]

Haha, I find it bittersweet justice. In order to Obama to win, he need minority voters. Minority voters are not going to vote in favor of gay rights, ever. It's a Catch-22. You got your President, now you lose all the leftwing laws you held so dear.

Not that I'm opposed to Prop 8. I really don't care. I think marriage is being made a total mockery of by the straight couples in this country. I don't see how gay marriage would tarnish anything.

Still, the irony makes me laugh.

 

[Navy1960]

Haha, I find it bittersweet justice. In order to Obama to win, he need minority voters. Minority voters are not going to vote in favor of gay rights, ever. It's a Catch-22. You got your President, now you lose all the leftwing laws you held so dear.

Not that I'm opposed to Prop 8. I really don't care. I think marriage is being made a total mockery of by the straight couples in this country. I don't see how gay marriage would tarnish anything.

Still, the irony makes me laugh.

On a personal level it doesn't matter to me one way or the other jsanders if gay couples get married. The thing I find interesting and somewhat disturbing here is this trend in the country to set aside votes you disagree with. IMHO the votes on prop 8 were no less important than the votes that someone made for Senator or President. I don't see anyone making an effort to set aside those votes with perhaps the exception of Minnesota.

 

[Jon]

On a personal level it doesn't matter to me one way or the other jsanders if gay couples get married. The thing I find interesting and somewhat disturbing here is this trend in the country to set aside votes you disagree with. IMHO the votes on prop 8 were no less important than the votes that someone made for Senator or President. I don't see anyone making an effort to set aside those votes with perhaps the exception of Minnesota.

I totally agree. Notice that in both cases (Minnesota and Prop 8), it's liberals trying to overturn the will of the people? So much for their self-righteous bitching about Bush stealing elections.

 

[Navy1960]

I totally agree. Notice that in both cases (Minnesota and Prop 8), it's liberals trying to overturn the will of the people? So much for their self-righteous bitching about Bush stealing elections.

I made this comment in another thread earlier, and that is that people involved in overturning elections by less than honorable means be they democrat or republican have no respect for the process that they themselves profess to honor so much. All the election issues of the past few years have shown that no party is excluded from playing around with voting results. As I said in the prop 8 situation and even here in Az. where we had the same result, it doesn't matter to me one way or the other, but if the voters as a whole wish it to be law and it does not violate the constitution then if that law does not satisfy someone then that is what we have a United States and laws vary from state to state. As I said once before, if I had not been allowed in the state I live in to marry my wife, I would have gone somewhere that would have allowed me too.

 

[Vel]

Lawyers for same-sex couples argued that the anti-gay-marriage measure was an illegal constitutional revision -- not a more limited amendment, as backers maintained -- because it fundamentally altered the guarantee of equal protection. A constitutional revision, unlike an amendment, must be approved by the Legislature before going to voters.


Like the others that have responded, I don't really care about the issue of gay marriage, but I can't see that this amendment violates equal protection. Granted, I haven't looked at the California constitution, but unless the state constitution or the amendment mentions marrying for love, then any man would have the the right to marry a woman and any woman would have the right to marry a man. By the same token NO man would have the right to marry another man and NO woman would have the right to marry another woman. If you take love out of the equation, there is no inequality.

 

[Caligirl]

This is a text-book example of what happens when the god-hating, death-loving, foaming-at-the-mouth liberals don't get their way..

Are you calling schwarzenegger that?

 

[Caligirl]

I totally agree. Notice that in both cases (Minnesota and Prop 8), it's liberals trying to overturn the will of the people?

Schwarzenegger????

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Schwarzenegger????

YES. He is Liberal as hell.

 

[DiveCon]

Are you calling schwarzenegger that?

YES
he IS a liberal

 

[DiveCon]

YES. He is Liberal as hell.

he might as well switch to democrat
at least then he'll get the yellow dog dems vote every time

 

[Jon]

Schwarzenegger????

What? You think Republican = not liberal?

 

[DiveCon]

What? You think Republican = not liberal?

no kidding
LOL

 

[WillowTree]

omg schwartzie is married to a catholic kennedy..

 

[Sunni Man]

Schwarzenegger is a fake Republican

I think he is a shill for the Kenndy democrats to control the republican party.

 

[editec]

This is a text-book example of what happens when the god-hating, death-loving, foaming-at-the-mouth liberals don't get their way..

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is a "god-hating, death-loving, foaming-at-the-mouth liberal"?!

Wow! I had no idea.

 

[Red Dawn]

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is a "god-hating, death-loving, foaming-at-the-mouth liberal"?!

Wow! I had no idea.

You must be a novice to political message boards.

Republican posters consider their party such a small-tent party, that anyone who isn't a fan of Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, and Rush Limbaugh is a "liberal".