NOTE: WROTE THIS THE OTHER DAY, BUT IT SOMEHOW DID NOT POST, HENCE ITS BEING POSTED NOW. When the people collectively decide to change their fundamental blueprint for government, the will of the majority outweighs any prior precedent – and……

Thousands gathered outside the Court to protest the Decision. Do these people have jobs???

– sbw999

Come on now, did you ask this about the Tea Party protestors?

It really bothers me that here in California, we can ammend the constitution of the state like this with a mere majority. A constitutional ammendment should have required a 2/3 majority. Constitutional ammendment by initiative process, as occurs in California, opens the door for tyranny of the majority.

I can’t believe more of the commentors here aren’t disturbed by this, understanding that it could just as easily be used to ammend the state constitution in a manner you oppose.

The streets came alive tonight with both pro and con Prop 8 people. It was relatively calm, however.

I was actually surprised that the Court allowed this to stand. When you consider all the things that the Court here in California has overturned in the past, I found it amazing that they actually upheld this, as well as allowed those that were married prior to the election…when gay marriage was still technically illegal…to stand.

Again, I have never stated which side I was on, and I do not ever plan to. I have several friends…good friends…who are gay and even they are split on the issue.

My real concern is the Nazi-esque tactics of the Anti-* crowd.

Look at what they did to those who supported and gave money to the Yes on 8 Campaign. What do you think that has done to any and all further elections on this issue? They have systematically forced many people out of their jobs, lost people income etc. just because they did not agree with them. Is anyone thinking that a further election where this is brought onto the ballot will be anything even closely resembling a fair election? Is anyone thinking there will be the slightest amount of personal or business donations made to any anti-gay marriage groups from now on?

Liberals only believe in equality and fairness so long as it relates to their cause. If anyone is opposed to what they want, they are fair game for all types of discriminatory actions. Amazing in this case, for it is they who are screaming about how this was discriminatory against a “protected minority” and then turn around and partake in activities that, were they conducted on GLBT businesses or peope, would be considered “hate crimes” r worse.

What the courts did was not religious. What the courts did was not discrimination. What they did was something rare in California. They upheld a legal election where the majority spoke. While the anti-8 crowd claim the court discriminated against the minority, they are, in essence, calling for the discrimination of the majority. Yeah…hypocrisy is their creed.

You are absolutely right! They want to force churches, religious persons and groups to accept and acknowledge their unholy version of marriage. Maybe they’re seeking absolution?

This is like saying, murder is illegal and immoral, but if you’ve committed a homicide prior to this law’s passage, well then…”Never Mind.” feel free to continue doing so

Fixed it for you

“A majority of this court finds that if you are a heterosexually challenged couple wishing to join together as a couple in California, it is unlawful to issue you a “Marriage” certificate.”

“This does not preclude you from being “joined” in a domestic partnership, as a loving, nurturing couple, however. In the event that you were mistakenly allowed to join in a state of marriage during that brief period after the first amendment was overturned (to show our Progressive contempt for California voters), and the passage of Proposition 8, your here-to-for called “Marriage” will still be recognized as a valid union recognized by the State of California, even though others in your classification of sexuality will be prohibited from using that term, as it is reserved exclusively to indicate a heterosexual union.”

“Feel free to file as many lawsuits challenging this ruling as you deem necessary, searching for a loophole that might overturn the people’s mandate, anew. We will bend over for you as much as possible.”

Sincerely,

The California State Supreme Court (Jesters)

This is like saying, murder is illegal and immoral, but if you’ve committed a homicide prior to this law’s passage, well then…”Never Mind.”

The legacy of “Bird Droppings” continue (you know, mis-Justice Diane Bird?}