What do you think?
Butt, of course.
California’s high court should not be weighing gay marriage. They should be weighing the legal precedent of a referendum and when it becomes Constitutional law and when and under what circumstances can the will of the people be put aside. Gay marriage is the ancillary issue.
Seven Rings for the Dwarf-kings on their thrones of stone...
WE THE PEOPLE have spoken. This in none of the court’s business. The voters of California need to remind them of that.
Isn’t the judiciary supposed to interpret the law? Sounds like they are trying to write it.
"We don't go vote on anyone else's rights," Frankeny said. "It's so demeaning."
Actually, Ms. Frankeny, every right that the government will enforce for you has been established as the result of a vote.
I think they will. Yesterday’s posturing was just for show, so they would appear deliberative before emerging in 89 days with a ruling in favor of gay marriage.
A constitutional amendment by its very nature cannot be unconstitutional.
“What do you think?”
I think the citizens need to run these 7 asswipes out of the country on a rail...
Judges in court are very fond on saying “if you don’t like the law, write to your legislator.” and “if you don’t like the constitution then vote and change it.” It is a very snide and demeaning comment usually made at the trial court level to people who have very little chance of appealing thier cases.
We now we find out how serious these judges are about the process.
Remember there is NOTHING stopping the homosexual advocates from going to their legislator and having a new pro-homosexual based marriage put on the ballot. They have the equal opportunity to do so.
The CSC will uphold Prop 8, but will also rule that the gay marriage which took place after the CSC made its now overruled decision, but before Prop 8’s adoption, are still valid.
Question,
Regardless of how this is viewed, will it be challenged to any other court? Like say U.S. Supremes?
Or is it simply a calif issue?
Title rewrite: “Calif. high court weighs marriage definition change”
But Associate Justices Joyce Kennard, Marvin Baxter and Ming Chin noted that voters successfully overturned a 1972 Supreme Court ruling that struck down the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment. When the measure was challenged, the court upheld it as a properly enacted amendment.
_______________________________________________________
I want these justices to keep remembering the death penalty battles and removing Justice Bird for thwarting the will of the people.
I’m reassured to hear they are looking at this properly. The people voted and that should stand. If they voted to have brownies delivered to their doors everyday, then so be it.