CA Law makers trying to overturn results of Prop 8!
11-11-2008, 02:28 PM
#46
250,000-mile Club President
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bizerkeley
Posts: 4,770
Car Info: MBP 02 WRX wagon
The current federal supreme court probably won't hear it, but I wouldn't bet against a more progressive SC in the future taking it up because of the 9th amendment argument.
State's rights do not trump the US constitution.
State's rights do not trump the US constitution.
11-11-2008, 02:43 PM
#47
Many do get involved with politics. The one I spent the most time at did so a lot and I didn't agree with it. They even had handouts on how to vote. So I'm not saying that all churches stay out of it. I also don't think that its wrong for a pastor to say here's what I think, here's an outline of the bills and what each side is saying...etc etc. I just don't think it should be done from the pulpit. And you're damn right... way too many people would run off a cliff full speed because their pastor says so. Without thinking on their own and without looking at what the bible says about it.
I'm not ignorant. And it's not brainwashing.
I thought it was far more disgusting that they used sounds of abuse and abuse as a bases for why dr.'s shouldn't have to tell parents their 13 year old daughter is getting an abortion. I'm sorry but a friggin minor is a friggin minor. I came from an abusive household and I still think ANY parent should know if a dr. is about to touch their child. Dr's are way way to much influence in making a decision for a minor and no teenager has the ability to make that decision alone or be equipped for a lifetime of the aftermath.
11-11-2008, 03:16 PM
#48
I don't need more cowbell dammit!
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Equally as important as Walter
Posts: 3,203
Car Info: E82
I was just watching CNN:
Apparently law makers are trying to overturn the results of prop 8 because they want equality, and they claim that CA voters cannot make such a big change to a state law.
Sorry, I dont have a link, but thats pretty much what they said verbatim.
First off, this is the second time the people voted against it and won. The first time around it was overturned which is total BS, whats the point of even having a democracy if the people can't vote and win on an issue that the majority wants to have changed?
I don't give a rats *** if a gay couple wants to be married, more power to them, but if the majority of people voted against it, not once, but TWICE, well then I'm sorry.
Before anyone jumps in and says "How would you feel if the majority of folks voted to ban guns?"... Gun ownership is specifically protected in the constitution, if they tried to ban guns all over the US there would be a massive revolt and the USA would no longer be the USA... Sorry for the hijack at the end there...
PS: I posted this in BAIC because it's a CA specific issue and not many people venture into the politics forum
Apparently law makers are trying to overturn the results of prop 8 because they want equality, and they claim that CA voters cannot make such a big change to a state law.
Sorry, I dont have a link, but thats pretty much what they said verbatim.
First off, this is the second time the people voted against it and won. The first time around it was overturned which is total BS, whats the point of even having a democracy if the people can't vote and win on an issue that the majority wants to have changed?
I don't give a rats *** if a gay couple wants to be married, more power to them, but if the majority of people voted against it, not once, but TWICE, well then I'm sorry.
Before anyone jumps in and says "How would you feel if the majority of folks voted to ban guns?"... Gun ownership is specifically protected in the constitution, if they tried to ban guns all over the US there would be a massive revolt and the USA would no longer be the USA... Sorry for the hijack at the end there...
PS: I posted this in BAIC because it's a CA specific issue and not many people venture into the politics forum
11-11-2008, 04:38 PM
#53
Yeah, You've Probably Never Heard Of Me.
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: in a glass case of emotion.
Posts: 17,962
Car Info: 345/30/19s
Unfortunately, democracy is not perfect, you might have even heard the phrase ""Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for lunch." and this is no more apparent than when it comes to one group having control over others rights.
You think womans sufferage would have passed if it was left up to a vote??
You think we would have had civil rights in the 60s if it were left up to a vote??
Hell, you think the slaves would have been free if it were left to a popular vote??
No, for as enlightened and freedom loving we always like to think our our country is, EVERY major advance in civil rights took a mandate, and it was NEVER taken easily, hell we had a WAR in this country over giving other human beings basic human rights, thats how far people will go to resist change and progress.
I can honestly say on this veterans day, thats NOT the country my grandfather died for.
Last edited by Krinkov; 11-11-2008 at 04:41 PM.
11-11-2008, 04:47 PM
#54
Yeah, You've Probably Never Heard Of Me.
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: in a glass case of emotion.
Posts: 17,962
Car Info: 345/30/19s
yeah you beat me to it, the point was this should never have even made it onto the ballot and every lawmaker new that. But you cant stop a proposition from just getting onto the ballot .thats why its called a 'proposition', not 'guarantee'. And this is the way it works with EVERY prop, once voted on they all still have to be approved by the legislature / California supreme court. If they are found to be in violation with the state constitution they will most likely be overturned.
Last edited by Krinkov; 11-11-2008 at 04:50 PM.
11-11-2008, 05:04 PM
#55
250,000-mile Club President
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bizerkeley
Posts: 4,770
Car Info: MBP 02 WRX wagon
If it were just a law proposition like prop 215 or most of the other recent propositions and initiatives, you'd be right Jeremy, but this was for a constitutional amendment, and the boneheads who put together California's constitution really screwed the pooch with this little pair of items;
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 18 AMENDING AND REVISING THE CONSTITUTION
SEC. 3. The electors may amend the Constitution by initiative.
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 18 AMENDING AND REVISING THE CONSTITUTION
SEC. 4. A proposed amendment or revision shall be submitted to the
electors and if approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect
the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise. If
provisions of 2 or more measures approved at the same election
conflict, those of the measure receiving the highest affirmative vote
shall prevail.
i.e. if there had been a counter measure initiative that passed, which ever of the two got the most popular votes- even by as little as 1 vote- would have to become the law of the land- no matter how ill-advised, mean-spirited or badly worded.
Last edited by psoper; 11-11-2008 at 05:14 PM.
11-11-2008, 06:16 PM
#56
Yeah, You've Probably Never Heard Of Me.
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: in a glass case of emotion.
Posts: 17,962
Car Info: 345/30/19s
If it were just a law proposition like prop 215 or most of the other recent propositions and initiatives, you'd be right Jeremy, but this was for a constitutional amendment, and the boneheads who put together California's constitution really screwed the pooch with this little pair of items;
11-11-2008, 06:30 PM
#57
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Discovery Bay, CA
Posts: 1,569
Car Info: Evo X GSR, F250 Powerstroke Diesel
I saw this on myspace earlier, its a petition to ban divorce to protect the union of marriage between a man and a woman.
Hella funny but imagine if they did ban Divorce, it sure would make people evaluate who they decide to marry a little more carefully and beat off the money hungry gold diggin hoes. I think they meant to shock the people who voted yes on prop 8, but I kinda would like to see this pass, LMAO!
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/pro...ohibit-divorce
Hella funny but imagine if they did ban Divorce, it sure would make people evaluate who they decide to marry a little more carefully and beat off the money hungry gold diggin hoes. I think they meant to shock the people who voted yes on prop 8, but I kinda would like to see this pass, LMAO!
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/pro...ohibit-divorce
11-12-2008, 12:56 PM
#58
BanHammer™
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Wagonmafia Propaganda Lieutenant
Posts: 47,588
Car Info: 2001 Forester RS2 SPEC-F
at least someone gets it
http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...ton-john_N.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...ton-john_N.htm
NEW YORK — Sir Elton John, accompanied by his longtime partner David Furnish, had some choice words about California's Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage that passed on Nov. 4.
In December 2005, John and Furnish tied the knot in a civil partnership ceremony in Windsor, England. But, clarified the singer, "We're not married. Let's get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."
John and Furnish, and their two cocker spaniels Marilyn and Arthur, were in town for Monday's annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation.
"I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership," said John. "The word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."
The dinner, held at Cipriani Wall Street, was hosted by CNN's Anderson Cooper and featured a performance from Gladys Knight. John's foundation gets a four-star rating, the highest available, from CharityNavigator.com and John, in his speech, called for the enactment of a national AIDS policy.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: United States | California | England | West Coast | Oscar | East Coast | Proposition | Arthur | Windsor | Anderson Cooper | Gladys Knight | Marilyn | David Furnish | Elton John AIDS Foundation | Cipriani Wall Street
What does the annual gala mean to him? "It means we get to see our friends on the East Coast who support us so much. It's a staple event for us on our calendar in America. We do the Oscar party on the West Coast and we do this on the East Coast," he said.
In December 2005, John and Furnish tied the knot in a civil partnership ceremony in Windsor, England. But, clarified the singer, "We're not married. Let's get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."
John and Furnish, and their two cocker spaniels Marilyn and Arthur, were in town for Monday's annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation.
"I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership," said John. "The word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."
The dinner, held at Cipriani Wall Street, was hosted by CNN's Anderson Cooper and featured a performance from Gladys Knight. John's foundation gets a four-star rating, the highest available, from CharityNavigator.com and John, in his speech, called for the enactment of a national AIDS policy.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: United States | California | England | West Coast | Oscar | East Coast | Proposition | Arthur | Windsor | Anderson Cooper | Gladys Knight | Marilyn | David Furnish | Elton John AIDS Foundation | Cipriani Wall Street
What does the annual gala mean to him? "It means we get to see our friends on the East Coast who support us so much. It's a staple event for us on our calendar in America. We do the Oscar party on the West Coast and we do this on the East Coast," he said.
11-12-2008, 12:56 PM
#59
BanHammer™
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Wagonmafia Propaganda Lieutenant
Posts: 47,588
Car Info: 2001 Forester RS2 SPEC-F
at least someone gets it
http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...ton-john_N.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...ton-john_N.htm
NEW YORK — Sir Elton John, accompanied by his longtime partner David Furnish, had some choice words about California's Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage that passed on Nov. 4.
In December 2005, John and Furnish tied the knot in a civil partnership ceremony in Windsor, England. But, clarified the singer, "We're not married. Let's get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."
John and Furnish, and their two cocker spaniels Marilyn and Arthur, were in town for Monday's annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation.
"I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership," said John. "The word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."
The dinner, held at Cipriani Wall Street, was hosted by CNN's Anderson Cooper and featured a performance from Gladys Knight. John's foundation gets a four-star rating, the highest available, from CharityNavigator.com and John, in his speech, called for the enactment of a national AIDS policy.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: United States | California | England | West Coast | Oscar | East Coast | Proposition | Arthur | Windsor | Anderson Cooper | Gladys Knight | Marilyn | David Furnish | Elton John AIDS Foundation | Cipriani Wall Street
What does the annual gala mean to him? "It means we get to see our friends on the East Coast who support us so much. It's a staple event for us on our calendar in America. We do the Oscar party on the West Coast and we do this on the East Coast," he said.
In December 2005, John and Furnish tied the knot in a civil partnership ceremony in Windsor, England. But, clarified the singer, "We're not married. Let's get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."
John and Furnish, and their two cocker spaniels Marilyn and Arthur, were in town for Monday's annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation.
"I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership," said John. "The word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."
The dinner, held at Cipriani Wall Street, was hosted by CNN's Anderson Cooper and featured a performance from Gladys Knight. John's foundation gets a four-star rating, the highest available, from CharityNavigator.com and John, in his speech, called for the enactment of a national AIDS policy.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: United States | California | England | West Coast | Oscar | East Coast | Proposition | Arthur | Windsor | Anderson Cooper | Gladys Knight | Marilyn | David Furnish | Elton John AIDS Foundation | Cipriani Wall Street
What does the annual gala mean to him? "It means we get to see our friends on the East Coast who support us so much. It's a staple event for us on our calendar in America. We do the Oscar party on the West Coast and we do this on the East Coast," he said.
