Prop 8 Pretrial
Loading...
Loading...
3,410
Loading...
29:25
Criminal Pre-Trial Proceedings - Part 2by PublicResourceOrg1,308 views- 2:11
JUDGE JUDY SPEAKS OUT ABOUT PROPOSITION 8 ON LARRY KING LIVEby REAVISEITEL126,987 views
- 1:27:32
Domestic Violence Awareness for Probation and Pretrial Services Officersby PublicResourceOrg1,608 views
- 12:01
On Proposition 8.by TheoreticalBullshit36,385 views
- 7:19
Prop 8 - Did Mormons Go Too Far?by AmericanNewsProject44,138 views
- 1:07
Proposition 8 commercialby yesonprop81025220,874 views
- 39:58
Criminal Pre-Trial Proceedings - Part 1by PublicResourceOrg3,876 views
- 2:05
Proposition 8 Trial Reenactment - ABCby TheMisken1,247 views
- 3:09
They Can't Turn The Lights Offby ruespieler33,649 views
- 2:40
Rob Reiner Challenges Prop 8by CBS10,186 views
- 2:23
Occupational Therapy Practice: Lifestyle Redesign®by USCOSOT22,187 views
- 1:11
YouTube coverage of Prop 8 Trial on appealby kickinghorse892568 views
- 5:38
Federal Prop 8 Trial "Day One"by depfox5,633 views
- 0:31
Yes on 8 TV Ad: Whether You Like It Or Notby VoteYesonProp8220,678 views
- 2:32
CNN: The Mormon Church vs. Proposition 8by CNN2,055 views
- 1:25
Proposition 8 Commercialby yesonprop81025132,435 views
- 3:33
Prop 8 PSA: Honk if You Hate Marriageby ImaginaryBitches64,226 views
- 3:35
Report from the Frontlines of the Prop 8 Trialby NCLRights2,332 views
- 3:33
Princeton Protests Proposition 8by DailyPrincetonian55,543 views
- 2:45
Pretrial 101 Videoby PretrialJustice1,286 views
Its NONSENSE to think anyone with a different opinion that yours is intolerant or judgmental or hateful or has a phobia.
BlackRepublican2010 2 years ago
In your case, the wolf IS the shepard.
RapscallionRebellion 2 years ago
Prejudice is not the same as Miscreant ...!
Who do You Want Guard Your Little "Lambs" a Wolf or the Shepard...?
chachapc007 2 years ago
"Gay marriage is self-excluding by definition."
--By a new definition that was inserted into the CA constitution 15 months ago and is the subject of the lawsuit referred to above.
The other groups I mentioned are not "self-excluding" only because the inserted definition did not provide that "Only marriage between brown-haired people (or Christian people or short people) is valid or recognized in CA."
Do you believe the "people" also have a right to exclude those groups, if they wish?
mike2jb 2 years ago
"Nor is red-head marriage or Jewish marriage or tall marriage."
Wrong. To the extent that a Jewish marriage is also a monogamous, consensual opposite-sex marriage, it's a fundamental right.
Gay marriage is self-excluding by definition. Equal protection no more entails gay marriages than it entails polygamous marriages.
sklanger 2 years ago
Except gay marriage isn't a basic civil right any more than polygamous marriage is a basic civil right.
Anyway, tough titties. The amendment process that has given Californians more expansive rights than those afforded by the federal Constitution can also abrogate those rights. You on the other hand want it to be a one-way ratchet: it giveth, but shall not taketh away.
That's nonsense, and smacks of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.
sklanger 2 years ago
Which is really an admission of defeat, since derision is not an argument. Nor petulance, for that matter.
You'd also be more believable if you didn't keep marking your own comments as spam. Ashamed? :)
sklanger 2 years ago
"Do you suppose California marriage licenses should be signed in pencil"
Only gay marriage licenses need be. Gay marriage advocates knew full well the risks they were taking by litigating a cause they knew would alienate the majority of voters. Too bad.
"Until 2008 when, according to you, they decided otherwise with Prop 8."
The people's will is allowed to change its mind.
Deal with it.
sklanger 2 years ago
@sklanger:
"It did. Until the people exercised their will again and decided otherwise."
-- I see. So in 2000 (Prop22) the people's "will" was that same-sex marriage was not to be permitted.
Then in 2007, as you just opined about AB 43, their "will" was that it IS permitted.
Until 2008 when, according to you, they "decided otherwise" with Prop 8.
Do you suppose California marriage licenses should be signed in pencil, sklanger, just in case some erasures are needed?
mike2jb 2 years ago
I will continue to point out your false statements of fact as long as you keep making them.
As for being convinced, they should be. Duly enacted and ratified amendments to the Constitution (like the 15th Amendment) represent the will of the people.
"If this Amendment is duly adopted, it will represent the will of the people accomplished in the manner prescribed by the Constitution." Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677, 692 (1973) (Powell, J., concurring).
Feel free to disagree with SCOTUS.
sklanger 2 years ago