So we all know that the homosexual agenda is to indoctrinate everyone, and use the argument of civil rights as their so-called “get out of jail free card.” I don’t happen to think it works like this.
So get this…..here’s some good news presented by the NY Times for the Yes on 8 camp. They reported that one of the major challenges for the judges is the slim batch of case law on the topic. There is essentially no precedent on the issue and therefore, the Supreme Court Justices don’t have any previous ruling that will constrict their decision and force them to rule in favor of homosexual marriage. Essentially, they are free to set the precedent that other courts will then have to follow. If they are able, they can start fresh in their decisions, without being bound by previous rulings on same-sex marriage and constitutional amendments. They Court said they would rule on Proposition 8 next year. A huge challenge being the, “slim batch of case law on the topic.”
The CA Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments over same-sex marriage again in December, and some such 18,000 alleged marriages hang in the balance. “And the justices could lose out, too; some are already being threatened with being voted out of office if they rule Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”
“This is the whole ballgame,” said Jesse Choper, a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley. “They earn their salaries in having to decide these things.” They get paid to be fair and impartial in their ruling, all while taking into serious consideration, the will of the voters, the majority of Californians who want the definition of marriage to be defined at “only between a man and a woman.” Only these marriages would be “valid or recognized” in CA. Gay rights activists might look at this lack of legal precedent as a potential slam-dunk for them, however, I think it that it will prove to be a win for traditional marriage and upholding Proposition 8. There’s not much telling the Court that is has to rule in favor of gay marriage or the alleged lack of civil rights the gays constantly complain of.
“The California Supreme Court has never articulated criteria for what makes something an amendment versus a revision,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the law school at the University of California, Irvine. “So I don’t think you can predict anything because there is so little law.”
Good news for those of us who voted YES on Proposition 8: “Supporters of the ban say legal history is on their side. “Whenever an amendment or an initiative has been challenged, almost always the court rejects that and upholds the people’s initiative power,” said Andrew Pugno, a lawyer for backers of the proposition, citing past state bans on the use of race, sex or ethnicity in college admissions and caps on property taxes. “These are major policy changes that the court has recognized are fine,” he said.”
That is part of the main problem. As I see it, gay rights activists and same-sex marriage proponents are bent out of shape because the YES on 8 campaign used the proper legislative process, took the issue up with the voters, placed the question on the ballot, and let the citizens decide what they wanted in THEIR Consitution, as in a consitution that belongs to ALL of us Californians. Gay rights activists seem to act like OUR constution belongs to ONLY THEM. WRONG!!!!!!! They need to wake up and stop whining that they didn’t get themselves together enough to put their own initiative on the ballot, to define marriage as they wanted to. Now they will just have to be at the mercy of the court. Talk about sour grapes…….
There have been few efforts to overturn same-sex marriage amendments in other states, and as David Masci, a senior research fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life in Washington states, “so far non have been successful.”
Along with speculation of what will happen to the same-sex marriages that have already been performed, I wonder why, if this was ssssooooo important to homosexuals, didn’t more people run out and get married! I know gay couples who didn’t bother to do so. It’s almost like the some of them are fighting for something that they don’t really have any intention of using, but then again, many people know it’s not about marriage, it’s about their take-over of society and destruction of morality within it. I really hope the court doesn’t buy in to this mess. With all of the studies about the unhealthy relationships that occur between homosexual couples, it’s not likely many of them would even marry, or if they did, would stay married. Why clog up the courts with more divorce nonsense and more complicated custody battles?????