Voters given chance to ban same-sex 'marriage'

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | July 16, 2008 | Bob Unruh

[Man50D]

The state Supreme Court in California is allowing voters this November to consider a plan to define marriage as one man and one woman, a move that could overturn that same court's ruling in May that same-sex duos should be recognized as "married."

Jennifer Kerns, communications director for Protect Marriage.com, which collected more than 1.1 million signatures on petitions in support of the vote, confirmed that the high court today simply dismissed the pending challenge to having Proposition 8 on the ballot.

"Obviously, the Supreme Court decision delivers a significant blow to our opponents," she told WND. "It does send a very strong message to our opponents that they won't be able to evade democracy which is what they've been trying to do by going to the court system.

"They've been trying to keep the ballot issue away from the people of California," she said. "The people of California, back in 2000, by more than a 61 percent majority, upheld the definition of marriage [as one man and one woman]. I believe they will do so again."

[Man50D]

Last month Liberty Counsel filed a motion to intervene in the case, asking the court to let the people vote on the marriage amendment.

How far has our government strayed from the Constitution when the judiciary is asked to allow people thier right to vote against something as immoral as homosexuality?

[goldstategop]

We're not even allowed to pass judgment on the Left, is a sign of how far our society has drifted from the Constitution.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[BooksForTheRight.com]

“Supreme Court in California is allowing voters this”
the court has no right to allow or disallow anything. The public has the right and the court did not grant the right.

[HiramQuick]

“Supreme Court in California is allowing voters this”

You are totally correct. But the gubmint screwels have edumacted ignorance ..... mantras like the above get tossed around so often that people all of sudden lose any rational thought. The other term you will see repeatedly in the imbecilic writings so called journalists produce relative to a judge or court is “Final Authority” That statement umplies” far more than the original intent.

[sirchtruth]

I believe they will do so again."

"Allowing", having to do "again" is the antithesis to the way our gov't should work! Californian's should be raising total hell because this is at least the second time they've voted on something and the courts took it away from them by usurping their vote.

Californian's do not ever forget this: The "people" allow the gov't/courts to do what they do.

[ivyleaguebrat]

Where is direct democracy endorsed in the Constitution?