Kenneth Star Takes to Court to Expand Proposition 8 to Nullify the Marriages that Took Place While CA Attorney General Takes to Court the Consitution Argument Against Prop 8

Updates of the latest Court Challenges from both sides of Proposition 8.

Channel Commentary: Do you ever get the feeling that Kenneth Star is just one of those people who isn't happy unless he's destroying the lives of others.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Jerry
• Brown
• Attorney
• General
• Proposition
• Same-Sex
• Marriage
• California
• Gay
• Lesbian
• Wedding
• Supreme
• Court

[pulvinosophist]

Prop 8 should be struck down. It's a disgrace. It's pure sanctimony and scapegoating.

[Jacksonholenativ]

Absolutely!!! Many Evangelicals and other extremists have a need to blame someone and demonize them for societies ills. They've always got to have a devil to fulfill their sick fantasy. "Oh it's the gay's fault. They're ruining marriage and our civilization." You should see what the "ex-gay" group Exodus International is involved with in Uganda. They support Uganda's leaders when they say that it was the gays that were responsible for the genocide that happened there. Inexcusable.

[JPRamon68]

You know if the mormons didn't stick their nose where it doesn't belong Prop 8 would not have passed. The real truth is that the Mormons bought prop 8 with 20 million dollars.

[bearchewtoy75]

Looks like we'll get our answer Thursday.

[pulseofthemaggotgirl]

California can do much better than this. I hope and pray that this is nullified invalid. I'm pretty sure that we'll get our answers come June.

[jfsfrnd]

Do you have an opinion on how the SC is going to rule on Prop 8?

[Rockymtntruth]

jfsfrnd I'm with you on all of this. California is like a different nation in some ways. The Governator even thinks so. ;)

[jfsfrnd]

You are preaching to the choir. Tell that to the Religious Right and their Christian sheep who voted for Prop 8. They believe they can overturn a Calif SC decision with an amendment by simple majority. They believe the "will of the people" will take precedence over a SC decision. It has been said that Justice Kennard will be the deciding vote. Who knows - she may give them what they want to teach them a lesson. I hope she doesn't. The will be chaos if she does.

[Rockymtntruth]

jfsfrnd Our Founders knew that the will of the majority was not always for good and that is why they placed checks and balances into the constitution. The old New England state constitutions carry that spirit within them. Representative Democracies are what we are talking about. If you have a pure democracy you have the danger of the tyranny and the chaos of the majority unless there is a check to that danger and that check has to be written into the constitution and interpreted by the courts

[jfsfrnd]

California has a bad rep re: their constitution and how easy it is to pass amendments - by simple majority. LOL

". . .govern by referendum."

That's because we live in a constitutional republic not a democracy. California has been pushing for something close to democracy and it is causing chaos.

[Rockymtntruth]

Precedence is being set state by state by state. Iowa's supreme court just ruled in favor of same sex marriage. Massachusetts and also Connecticut. These states are setting powerful precedent. Vermont, who's legislature overturned through majority vote the Republican Governor's veto against same sex marriage. Same sex marriage is now legal in Vermont as well. Vermont's legislatures said "Vermont is not like California who willy nilly changes their constitution and govern's by referendum."

[jfsfrnd]

Did "the people" have confidence about how interracial marriage would affect society during the era of Perez v. Sharp and Loving v. Virginia?

Until there is a "gay test" there will be no factual scientific evidence. Both sides make claims that are not entirely factual. Some people have a choice and some don't. The only way to know if someone is gay is by "self reporting".

The SC made a decision in May 2008. Who is supposed to interpret what the constitution says - the SC or the people"?