User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 11 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 8 of 83

Thread: Special Comment: Proposition 8

  1. #1
    Californian in DC DrWurm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    1,169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Special Comment: Proposition 8

    This is why I, a straight male, voted no on prop 8. Tonight Keith Olbermann put aside his partisanship and appealed to the nation as simply a human being. Warning: thick with emotion.


  2. #2
    BigBella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    SF, CA
    Posts
    2,972
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DrWurm View Post
    This is why I, a straight male, voted no on prop 8. Tonight Keith Olbermann put aside his partisanship and appealed to the nation as simply a human being. Warning: thick with emotion.
    I didn't have a horse in that race either, but I honestly believe that the "success" of Proposition Eight was more a referendum on the megalomaniacal conduct of California judges -- particularly those of the Ninth Circuit, here in Northern California -- than on the actual subject of gay marriage; had the court not overreached so many time in the past, reversing the will of the voters, on so many issues, I don't believe it would have passed.

    I would watch the posted video but I suffer from chronic Olbermann intolerance with much the same effect as that of lactose . . .
    “Sì perché l'autorità dell'opinione di mille nelle scienze non val per una scintilla di ragione di un solo . . ."

    -- Galileo "Biff" Galilei

  3. #3
    Californian in DC DrWurm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    1,169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, if those megalomaniacal judges had overreached the majority on the issue of an interracial marriage ban, is that still a valid argument? Perhaps they saw that in this case, the majority was wrong.

    Those who voted yes because the "people had already spoken" don't quite understand the concept of democracy.

  4. #4
    scottychaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Western New York, USA
    Posts
    2,970
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Im really torn on this issue..
    because it clashes on two positions I feel strongly about:

    1. liberals really DO use the courts to try to pass laws "the people" (majority) are against..
    I think this is a very bad thing..the people should decide laws, not judges.
    so in that sense, I think what happened with prop 8 was "the right thing"..
    it was a case of democracy working properly..to cut down a ruling that should have never been made,
    because it was made improperly..(how did judges get all this power anyway??)

    2. gays SHOULD totally have the right to marry! im sorry "the people" of California dont see it that way..yet..

    All we can do is wait for the older generations to die off..
    IMO, its really the exact same thing as racial prejudice..
    "The people" just elected a black president..which I never expected to see in my lifetime!
    Gay rights will also eventually reach the same point..true equality for all.
    We just need to wait for the majority to get with the program..

    and before anyone says "maybe the majority is right?"
    "the majority" also once supported slavery, lack of womens rights, segregation, etc etc..
    just because its the majority, doesnt mean its right..

    Scot

  5. #5
    Californian in DC DrWurm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    1,169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Before this explodes. Might I ask posters to ignore certain comments that are purely inflammatory and focus on the real issues.

    Thanks
    -Jason

  6. #6
    scottychaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Western New York, USA
    Posts
    2,970
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DrWurm View Post
    Well, if those megalomaniacal judges had overreached the majority on the issue of an interracial marriage ban, is that still a valid argument? Perhaps they saw that in this case, the majority was wrong.
    Even if you think that majority is wrong (and I do in this case)
    what gives judges the right to over-ride the majority?

    Im really curious..because this is happening all over the country..
    how can judges have this power?
    since when do judges get to dictate laws?
    (apart from the Supreme court of course..thats different)

    when did this happen? and why?
    its a very very bad thing..regardless of what lofty ideals these judges might be supporting.

    if it was conservative judges trying to pass their own laws that the majority didnt support, like say, banning stem cell research or whatever, bypassing the proper lawmakers and voting procedures, you just know liberals would be up in arms about it, calling it improper..
    and it is...its just as wrong in this case too..

    how can judges do this?
    anyone have the history on this concept?

    Scot

  7. #7
    BigBella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    SF, CA
    Posts
    2,972
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DrWurm View Post
    Well, if those megalomaniacal judges had overreached the majority on the issue of an interracial marriage ban, is that still a valid argument? Perhaps they saw that in this case, the majority was wrong.
    Well, you could look at it that way, but if amendments to the California State Constitution allow for the input and alteration by the hoi polloi as the document itself states, then it will be up to the swarms of lawyers and the California State Supreme Court to hash it out.

    Those who I knew who were supporters of Proposition 8 -- many of whom, by the way, are in the legal profession -- didn't give a rat's *** (nor do I) about gay marriage; it was the overreaching courts that they had an issue with. It would seem that 3-5% of our state's population were collateral damage in that argument. Regrettable . . .
    “Sì perché l'autorità dell'opinione di mille nelle scienze non val per una scintilla di ragione di un solo . . ."

    -- Galileo "Biff" Galilei

  8. #8
    Californian in DC DrWurm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    1,169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Maybe because they saw that the majority was supporting something that, while it may be a constitutional gray area, is against the intention of our constitution. I can't speak to the other cases you are unhappy about. But in this case, the constitution clearly intends to give equality to ALL people.

    Those judges upheld our greatest American value: All Men Are Created Equal.

Page 1 of 11 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. A Special Project
    By PlantAKiss in forum 2006 NASC Benefit Auction
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-02-2006, 10:27 PM
  2. A very special thanks,
    By adnedarn in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-05-2004, 07:28 PM
  3. Special Thanks to...
    By PlantAKiss in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 12-01-2003, 03:46 AM
  4. WE ALL ARE SPECIAL
    By CaptainDrosera in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-26-2003, 04:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •